Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today
I have stated once and I believe others have agreed. The data in the database is confidential. That was a very important point when the TMCH was created. I think your attempt to bully people by saying we have to draw a certain conclusion (one the most surprisingly supports your viewpoint) is the outcome of keeping this information confidential. J. Scott [ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:05 PM To: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com> Cc: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today With information like that below, and recognizing that the TMCH sunrise and notice programs were intended to provide a balanced approach: 1. I fail to see any reason why we should not be allowed to view the database; or 2. Treat the failure to be transparent as conclusive evidence that the system is being gamed beyond the balance point, thus justifying revision. I have seen several emails protesting such transparency but although having asked several times, I have never seen any evidence contradicting the facts noted below, or any legal basis for precluding transparency. I join George in asking that this issue be opened to the air so to speak and that we push for disclosure of the TMCH database so that we can perform our job to determine if the programs are being abused. Sent from my iPad On 10 Apr 2017, at 23:27, Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expedia.com<mailto:migraham@expedia.com>> wrote: George: Again, apologies for coming into this conversation late, but could you clarify what you meaning by the term “gaming”? The only usage I can call to mind in connection with the TMCH would be (1) the acquisition of a trademark registration without actual or intended use of the trademark in order to register the registration in the TMCH, or (2) the fabrication of evidence of Use and its submission to the TMCH in order to entitle one to Sunrise registration. Michael R. Graham From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 2:18 PM To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today Some more examples of gaming of the TMCH sunrises, via public blog posts: 1. via Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FDomainIncite...>: http://domainincite.com/16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainincite.com%2F16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=oKvX%2F%2FaTf71pNw35%2FwIPwHZ1A86CCevwUJe%2BmEprubE%3D&reserved=0> DIRECT, CLOUD, and SOCIAL Note the comments below that blog post by John Berryhill, who wrote "…and the attorney who was unable to use her client’s US registration for “PHYSICS” with the inconvenient disclaimer, and who then obtained a late change in the TMCH rules allowing figurative registrations, so that her client could use a foreign logo registration to obtain the TMCH entry for that word… is she an IPC member, Kristina?" implying that the common term "PHYSICS" might also be gamed, by an IPC member. And there are other comments by him and others on that page that are worth reading. 2. via Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FOnlineDomain...>: http://onlinedomain.com/2014/04/15/legal/fake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinedomain.com%2F2014%2F04%2F15%2Flegal%2Ffake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=awb9kdJMn%2Bd8lIsEfbBL1XT1jA9fD3hrikfyw%2Bpqgpw%3D&reserved=0> regarding CLOUD, SOCIAL, BUILD, BET, VACATION, DISCOUNT, WEDDING and others (...etc.) More than 30 TMs of very common terms are mentioned, and over 300 domains were found by that one blogger. There are 46 comments to that blog post, too. I renew the call for a public comment period, so that more of these kinds of examples of can be submitted to the working group. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=W3NxAFqGg0UWaOTDZjscJEQ%2BYoy1qWd%2Fp1%2BONVGi9UE%3D&reserved=0> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu<mailto:Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu>> wrote: When you refuse to say what you would count as evidence of a problem, that leaves us with the evidence I, and George, and Bret, and others have offered--if we want to call them "Group 2" TMCH registrants that would make sense to me. Rebecca Tushnet Georgetown Law 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://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=0vL9XYtoMgqsavb6DwmGsl6hfOwISK6zj2cyvbs6H10%3D&reserved=0>
I think Paul Keating is right to argue that we should draw an adverse inference from this failure to be transparent with the TMCH database: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference Name-calling about who is "bullying" isn't going to be productive (oh, "you are", no "you are", "I'm rubber, you're glue.....") Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:11 PM, J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg < gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> wrote:
I have stated once and I believe others have agreed. The data in the database is confidential. That was a very important point when the TMCH was created. I think your attempt to bully people by saying we have to draw a certain conclusion (one the most surprisingly supports your viewpoint) is the outcome of keeping this information confidential.
J. Scott
[image: ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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: *Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:05 PM *To: *"Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com> *Cc: *"gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today
With information like that below, and recognizing that the TMCH sunrise and notice programs were intended to provide a balanced approach:
1. I fail to see any reason why we should not be allowed to view the database; or
2. Treat the failure to be transparent as conclusive evidence that the system is being gamed beyond the balance point, thus justifying revision.
I have seen several emails protesting such transparency but although having asked several times, I have never seen any evidence contradicting the facts noted below, or any legal basis for precluding transparency.
I join George in asking that this issue be opened to the air so to speak and that we push for disclosure of the TMCH database so that we can perform our job to determine if the programs are being abused.
Sent from my iPad
On 10 Apr 2017, at 23:27, Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expedia.com> wrote:
George:
Again, apologies for coming into this conversation late, but could you clarify what you meaning by the term “gaming”?
The only usage I can call to mind in connection with the TMCH would be (1) the acquisition of a trademark registration without actual or intended use of the trademark in order to register the registration in the TMCH, or (2) the fabrication of evidence of Use and its submission to the TMCH in order to entitle one to Sunrise registration.
Michael R. Graham
*From:* gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@ icann.org <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *George Kirikos *Sent:* Monday, April 10, 2017 2:18 PM *To:* gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today
Some more examples of gaming of the TMCH sunrises, via public blog posts:
1. via Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite.com <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FDomainIncite...> :
http://domainincite.com/16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainincite...>
DIRECT, CLOUD, and SOCIAL
Note the comments below that blog post by John Berryhill, who wrote "…and the attorney who was unable to use her client’s US registration for “PHYSICS” with the inconvenient disclaimer, and who then obtained a late change in the TMCH rules allowing figurative registrations, so that her client could use a foreign logo registration to obtain the TMCH entry for that word… is she an IPC member, Kristina?"
implying that the common term "PHYSICS" might also be gamed, by an IPC member. And there are other comments by him and others on that page that are worth reading.
2. via Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain.com <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FOnlineDomain...> :
http://onlinedomain.com/2014/04/15/legal/fake-trademarks- stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises/ <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinedomain...>
regarding CLOUD, SOCIAL, BUILD, BET, VACATION, DISCOUNT, WEDDING and others (...etc.) More than 30 TMs of very common terms are mentioned, and over 300 domains were found by that one blogger. There are 46 comments to that blog post, too.
I renew the call for a public comment period, so that more of these kinds of examples of can be submitted to the working group.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/ <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com...>
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet@law. georgetown.edu> wrote:
When you refuse to say what you would count as evidence of a problem, that leaves us with the evidence I, and George, and Bret, and others have offered--if we want to call them "Group 2" TMCH registrants that would make sense to me.
Rebecca Tushnet
Georgetown Law
703 593 6759
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.or...>
_______________________________________________ gnso-rpm-wg mailing list gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
I fundamentally disagree with that premise. Our job on this WG is to identify and fix problems. You should not and, IMHO, cannot assume a problem based on a philosophical bent on an issue. If you cannot identify a problem, the harms caused by the problem, come up with a reasonable solution and come to consensus around the solution: the status quo holds. J. Scott [ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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: George Kirikos <icann@leap.com> Date: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:17 PM To: J Scott Evans <jsevans@adobe.com> Cc: Paul Keating <paul@law.es>, "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com>, "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today I think Paul Keating is right to argue that we should draw an adverse inference from this failure to be transparent with the TMCH database: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAdverse_inference&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caa079686e06f40a8dd4608d4805f669e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274594614225249&sdata=I0qlscXGuj8bSSL507mzfboA96stifEx4mZa3gkmwFo%3D&reserved=0> Name-calling about who is "bullying" isn't going to be productive (oh, "you are", no "you are", "I'm rubber, you're glue.....") Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caa079686e06f40a8dd4608d4805f669e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274594614225249&sdata=3rQOxJ46DYdFeNTSRDkPmN%2Fcl3n3a8uXxN2N8sN37hE%3D&reserved=0> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:11 PM, J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>> wrote: I have stated once and I believe others have agreed. The data in the database is confidential. That was a very important point when the TMCH was created. I think your attempt to bully people by saying we have to draw a certain conclusion (one the most surprisingly supports your viewpoint) is the outcome of keeping this information confidential. J. Scott [tps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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<mailto:jsevans@adobe.com> www.adobe.com<http://www.adobe.com> From: <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Paul Keating <paul@law.es<mailto:paul@law.es>> Date: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:05 PM To: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com<mailto:migraham@expedia.com>> Cc: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today With information like that below, and recognizing that the TMCH sunrise and notice programs were intended to provide a balanced approach: 1. I fail to see any reason why we should not be allowed to view the database; or 2. Treat the failure to be transparent as conclusive evidence that the system is being gamed beyond the balance point, thus justifying revision. I have seen several emails protesting such transparency but although having asked several times, I have never seen any evidence contradicting the facts noted below, or any legal basis for precluding transparency. I join George in asking that this issue be opened to the air so to speak and that we push for disclosure of the TMCH database so that we can perform our job to determine if the programs are being abused. Sent from my iPad On 10 Apr 2017, at 23:27, Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expedia.com<mailto:migraham@expedia.com>> wrote: George: Again, apologies for coming into this conversation late, but could you clarify what you meaning by the term “gaming”? The only usage I can call to mind in connection with the TMCH would be (1) the acquisition of a trademark registration without actual or intended use of the trademark in order to register the registration in the TMCH, or (2) the fabrication of evidence of Use and its submission to the TMCH in order to entitle one to Sunrise registration. Michael R. Graham From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 2:18 PM To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today Some more examples of gaming of the TMCH sunrises, via public blog posts: 1. via Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FDomainIncite...>: http://domainincite.com/16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainincite.com%2F16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=oKvX%2F%2FaTf71pNw35%2FwIPwHZ1A86CCevwUJe%2BmEprubE%3D&reserved=0> DIRECT, CLOUD, and SOCIAL Note the comments below that blog post by John Berryhill, who wrote "…and the attorney who was unable to use her client’s US registration for “PHYSICS” with the inconvenient disclaimer, and who then obtained a late change in the TMCH rules allowing figurative registrations, so that her client could use a foreign logo registration to obtain the TMCH entry for that word… is she an IPC member, Kristina?" implying that the common term "PHYSICS" might also be gamed, by an IPC member. And there are other comments by him and others on that page that are worth reading. 2. via Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FOnlineDomain...>: http://onlinedomain.com/2014/04/15/legal/fake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinedomain.com%2F2014%2F04%2F15%2Flegal%2Ffake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=awb9kdJMn%2Bd8lIsEfbBL1XT1jA9fD3hrikfyw%2Bpqgpw%3D&reserved=0> regarding CLOUD, SOCIAL, BUILD, BET, VACATION, DISCOUNT, WEDDING and others (...etc.) More than 30 TMs of very common terms are mentioned, and over 300 domains were found by that one blogger. There are 46 comments to that blog post, too. I renew the call for a public comment period, so that more of these kinds of examples of can be submitted to the working group. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=W3NxAFqGg0UWaOTDZjscJEQ%2BYoy1qWd%2Fp1%2BONVGi9UE%3D&reserved=0> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu<mailto:Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu>> wrote: When you refuse to say what you would count as evidence of a problem, that leaves us with the evidence I, and George, and Bret, and others have offered--if we want to call them "Group 2" TMCH registrants that would make sense to me. Rebecca Tushnet Georgetown Law 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://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=0vL9XYtoMgqsavb6DwmGsl6hfOwISK6zj2cyvbs6H10%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ 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://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7Caa079686e06f40a8dd4608d4805f669e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274594614235254&sdata=kpBr08QSOeeb%2BC%2FR0mIkwmOU3PjP67gzrLf6RWzG7h0%3D&reserved=0>
Sometimes I wonder if we're reading the same mailing list. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:25 PM, J. Scott Evans <jsevans@adobe.com> wrote:
I fundamentally disagree with that premise. Our job on this WG is to identify and fix problems. You should not and, IMHO, cannot assume a problem based on a philosophical bent on an issue. If you cannot identify a problem, the harms caused by the problem, come up with a reasonable solution and come to consensus around the solution: the status quo holds.
Numerous problems have already been identified with regards to gaming. (and Michael Graham's followup email was too narrow -- the evidence is with respect to gaming, period, not only free speech, etc. It's about ensuring a level playing field, fairness, balancing the interests,). In your own email, just a few hours ago, you (J. Scott) wrote: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-April/001326.html "We can fix that." Presumably, that's an acknowledgement that you've seen a problem. Yet, we get repeated statements by some that there are no problems, even after the evidence is presented. Unbelievable. Perhaps it's a strategy to numb everyone into submission, with a refrain of "Where's the evidence?" "That's not evidence." "That's anecdotal, and not evidence", "That's not enough evidence". "The database is secret, and can't be used to provide you with evidence." etc. That's obstructionist. Enough evidence has already been provided (although even more could be provided via a public comment period, soliciting more evidence of abuse of the TMCH). To borrow a phrase, the burden has now shifted to those who want to maintain the TMCH and its related sunrise period, etc. If that burden is not met, then the TMCH should be scaled back or repealed/replaced. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
Sorry I did not finish my thought: Your attempt to bully people into a corner is not productive. Produce some proof. All I keep hearing is assumptions based on random articles and speculation. [ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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 "J. Scott Evans via gnso-rpm-wg" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Reply-To: J Scott Evans <jsevans@adobe.com> Date: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:11 PM To: Paul Keating <paul@law.es>, "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com> Cc: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today I have stated once and I believe others have agreed. The data in the database is confidential. That was a very important point when the TMCH was created. I think your attempt to bully people by saying we have to draw a certain conclusion (one the most surprisingly supports your viewpoint) is the outcome of keeping this information confidential. J. Scott [tps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.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: Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:05 PM To: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@expedia.com> Cc: "gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today With information like that below, and recognizing that the TMCH sunrise and notice programs were intended to provide a balanced approach: 1. I fail to see any reason why we should not be allowed to view the database; or 2. Treat the failure to be transparent as conclusive evidence that the system is being gamed beyond the balance point, thus justifying revision. I have seen several emails protesting such transparency but although having asked several times, I have never seen any evidence contradicting the facts noted below, or any legal basis for precluding transparency. I join George in asking that this issue be opened to the air so to speak and that we push for disclosure of the TMCH database so that we can perform our job to determine if the programs are being abused. Sent from my iPad On 10 Apr 2017, at 23:27, Michael Graham (ELCA) <migraham@expedia.com<mailto:migraham@expedia.com>> wrote: George: Again, apologies for coming into this conversation late, but could you clarify what you meaning by the term “gaming”? The only usage I can call to mind in connection with the TMCH would be (1) the acquisition of a trademark registration without actual or intended use of the trademark in order to register the registration in the TMCH, or (2) the fabrication of evidence of Use and its submission to the TMCH in order to entitle one to Sunrise registration. Michael R. Graham From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 2:18 PM To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] Action Items, Slides and Notes from the Working Group call held earlier today Some more examples of gaming of the TMCH sunrises, via public blog posts: 1. via Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FDomainIncite...>: http://domainincite.com/16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomainincite.com%2F16492-how-one-guy-games-new-gtld-sunrise-periods&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=oKvX%2F%2FaTf71pNw35%2FwIPwHZ1A86CCevwUJe%2BmEprubE%3D&reserved=0> DIRECT, CLOUD, and SOCIAL Note the comments below that blog post by John Berryhill, who wrote "…and the attorney who was unable to use her client’s US registration for “PHYSICS” with the inconvenient disclaimer, and who then obtained a late change in the TMCH rules allowing figurative registrations, so that her client could use a foreign logo registration to obtain the TMCH entry for that word… is she an IPC member, Kristina?" implying that the common term "PHYSICS" might also be gamed, by an IPC member. And there are other comments by him and others on that page that are worth reading. 2. via Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FOnlineDomain...>: http://onlinedomain.com/2014/04/15/legal/fake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinedomain.com%2F2014%2F04%2F15%2Flegal%2Ffake-trademarks-stealing-generic-domains-in-new-gtld-sunrises%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=awb9kdJMn%2Bd8lIsEfbBL1XT1jA9fD3hrikfyw%2Bpqgpw%3D&reserved=0> regarding CLOUD, SOCIAL, BUILD, BET, VACATION, DISCOUNT, WEDDING and others (...etc.) More than 30 TMs of very common terms are mentioned, and over 300 domains were found by that one blogger. There are 46 comments to that blog post, too. I renew the call for a public comment period, so that more of these kinds of examples of can be submitted to the working group. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leap.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=W3NxAFqGg0UWaOTDZjscJEQ%2BYoy1qWd%2Fp1%2BONVGi9UE%3D&reserved=0> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Rebecca Tushnet <Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu<mailto:Rebecca.Tushnet@law.georgetown.edu>> wrote: When you refuse to say what you would count as evidence of a problem, that leaves us with the evidence I, and George, and Bret, and others have offered--if we want to call them "Group 2" TMCH registrants that would make sense to me. Rebecca Tushnet Georgetown Law 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://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-rpm-wg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4330c3c36a16480d91ee08d4805dbb94%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636274587465434210&sdata=0vL9XYtoMgqsavb6DwmGsl6hfOwISK6zj2cyvbs6H10%3D&reserved=0>
participants (2)
-
George Kirikos -
J. Scott Evans