NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135
Hello SubPro IRT, We will cover the following topics regarding the Next Round Base RA in meeting #135 tomorrow, 29 April: 1. Name Collision Report Handling, Spec 6, Sec 6.3.1 & 6.3.2, 2. Specification 13 3. Specification 14 Attached please find the redlines we will review. Also, the incorrect document is posted on the SubPro IRT wiki from our discussion on Recommendation 36.4. Until we resolve, please fine the correct redline we reviewed in meeting #134 on Thursday, 24 April. Regards, Karla
My comments to Spec 13 in the attached. In sum: 1. In section 2, ICANN should not be able to later reasonably determine that a TLD no longer qualifies as a .BRAND for the same reasons that an arbitration panel overturned such decision [cid:image001.png@01DBB86E.AB6C81D0] 1. There is no Section 3 – it goes from Section 2 to Section 4. 1. As I discussed previously on the list, why should individual licensees be excluded from possible registrants if they meet the other requirements? I am guessing the concern is to avoid ROs from claiming Spec 13 status and then offering registrations to anyone. But that does not seem to be a valid concern because there is also the requirement that the trademark license “is for the use of such trademark in the regular course of that entity’s business outside of the provision of Registry Services, and is not primarily for the purpose of enabling registration or use of domain names in the TLD.” There are a number of brands where individual persons might be legitimate trademark licensees and need to use the trademark (and a domain name in the .brand TLD) as par of their regular business. For example, Realtors or individual insurance or other brokers working for a large company. Best regards, Marc H. Trachtenberg Shareholder Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601 T +1 312.456.1020 M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/> | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [cid:image003.png@01DBB86E.ADB671D0] From: Karla Hakansson via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 6:17 PM To: subpro-irt@icann.org Subject: [SubPro-IRT] NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135 *EXTERNAL TO GT* Hello SubPro IRT, We will cover the following topics regarding the Next Round Base RA in meeting #135 tomorrow, 29 April: 1. Name Collision Report Handling, Spec 6, Sec 6.3.1 & 6.3.2, 2. Specification 13 3. Specification 14 Attached please find the redlines we will review. Also, the incorrect document is posted on the SubPro IRT wiki from our discussion on Recommendation 36.4. Until we resolve, please fine the correct redline we reviewed in meeting #134 on Thursday, 24 April. Regards, Karla
Thanks Marc. Re brand licensees, another reason not to exclude them from .brand applications is that some companies choose to hold all trademarks (and other IP) in an IP holding company and then license these brands individually to particular operating subsidiaries of the parent company. There are strategic legal reasons for this licensing that serve risk management goals and the operating subs should not be disqualified from running .brand TLDs. Maybe we just need to make sure the license extends through the full contracting period of the TLD (ten years.) Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT < subpro-irt@icann.org> wrote:
My comments to Spec 13 in the attached.
In sum:
1. In section 2, ICANN should not be able to later reasonably determine that a TLD no longer qualifies as a .BRAND for the same reasons that an arbitration panel overturned such decision
2. There is no Section 3 – it goes from Section 2 to Section 4.
3. As I discussed previously on the list, why should individual licensees be excluded from possible registrants if they meet the other requirements? I am guessing the concern is to avoid ROs from claiming Spec 13 status and then offering registrations to anyone. But that does not seem to be a valid concern because there is also the requirement that the trademark license “is for the use of such trademark in the regular course of that entity’s business outside of the provision of Registry Services, and is not primarily for the purpose of enabling registration or use of domain names in the TLD.” There are a number of brands where individual persons might be legitimate trademark licensees and need to use the trademark (and a domain name in the .brand TLD) as par of their regular business. For example, Realtors or individual insurance or other brokers working for a large company.
Best regards,
*Marc H. Trachtenberg * Shareholder
Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601 T +1 312.456.1020
M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com <trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h>
[image: Greenberg Traurig Logo]
*From:* Karla Hakansson via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> *Sent:* Monday, April 28, 2025 6:17 PM *To:* subpro-irt@icann.org *Subject:* [SubPro-IRT] NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135
**EXTERNAL TO GT**
Hello SubPro IRT,
We will cover the following topics regarding the Next Round Base RA in meeting #135 tomorrow, 29 April:
1. Name Collision Report Handling, Spec 6, Sec 6.3.1 & 6.3.2, 2. Specification 13 3. Specification 14
Attached please find the redlines we will review. Also, the incorrect document is posted on the SubPro IRT wiki from our discussion on Recommendation 36.4. Until we resolve, please fine the correct redline we reviewed in meeting #134 on Thursday, 24 April.
Regards,
Karla
_______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list -- subpro-irt@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to subpro-irt-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ 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) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
All, We are in implementation, not policymaking. We came out of the SubPro with clear language and we keep renegotiating it. I'm confused because we do not have people, resources or mandate to redo the policy discussions. For example, there is no time or interest in raising questions such as the renewal expectancy of the contract and how that impacts the discussion below (below) and expanding definitions (earlier email). We have to stop somewhere... Best, Kathy On 4/29/2025 10:06 AM, Anne ICANN via SubPro-IRT wrote:
Thanks Marc. Re brand licensees, another reason not to exclude them from .brand applications is that some companies choose to hold all trademarks (and other IP) in an IP holding company and then license these brands individually to particular operating subsidiaries of the parent company. There are strategic legal reasons for this licensing that serve risk management goals and the operating subs should not be disqualified from running .brand TLDs. Maybe we just need to make sure the license extends through the full contracting period of the TLD (ten years.)
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> wrote:
My comments to Spec 13 in the attached.
In sum:
1. In section 2, ICANN should not be able to later reasonably determine that a TLD no longer qualifies as a .BRAND for the same reasons that an arbitration panel overturned such decision
2. There is no Section 3 – it goes from Section 2 to Section 4.
3. As I discussed previously on the list, why should individual licensees be excluded from possible registrants if they meet the other requirements? I am guessing the concern is to avoid ROs from claiming Spec 13 status and then offering registrations to anyone. But that does not seem to be a valid concern because there is also the requirement that the trademark license “is for the use of such trademark in the regular course of that entity’s business outside of the provision of Registry Services, and is not primarily for the purpose of enabling registration or use of domain names in the TLD.” There are a number of brands where individual persons might be legitimate trademark licensees and need to use the trademark (and a domain name in the .brand TLD) as par of their regular business. For example, Realtors or individual insurance or other brokers working for a large company.
Best regards,
*Marc H. Trachtenberg * Shareholder
Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601 T +1 312.456.1020
M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com <mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com <http://www.gtlaw.com/> | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h>
Greenberg Traurig Logo
*From:*Karla Hakansson via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> *Sent:* Monday, April 28, 2025 6:17 PM *To:* subpro-irt@icann.org *Subject:* [SubPro-IRT] NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135
**EXTERNAL TO GT**
Hello SubPro IRT,
We will cover the following topics regarding the Next Round Base RA in meeting #135 tomorrow, 29 April:
1. Name Collision Report Handling, Spec 6, Sec 6.3.1 & 6.3.2, 2. Specification 13 3. Specification 14
Attached please find the redlines we will review. Also, the incorrect document is posted on the SubPro IRT wiki from our discussion on Recommendation 36.4. Until we resolve, please fine the correct redline we reviewed in meeting #134 on Thursday, 24 April.
Regards,
Karla
_______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list -- subpro-irt@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to subpro-irt-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ 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) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
_______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list --subpro-irt@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email tosubpro-irt-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ 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) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
I don’t know whether requiring that a licensee for a .BRAND have a trademark license for the entire 10 year term is policy or implementation, but I don’t support it either way. The licensee should be subject o a license that s effeciuve while they own or control the DNS of the domain name registered in the .BRAND TLD. I believe my comments below go toward implementation. Best regards, Marc H. Trachtenberg Shareholder Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601 T +1 312.456.1020 M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/> | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [cid:image002.png@01DBB8FF.AE7276F0] From: Kathy Kleiman via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 10:23 AM To: subpro-irt@icann.org Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Re: NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135 All, We are in implementation, not policymaking. We came out of the SubPro with clear language and we keep renegotiating it. I'm confused because we do not have people, resources or mandate to redo the policy discussions. For example, there is no time or interest in raising questions such as the renewal expectancy of the contract and how that impacts the discussion below (below) and expanding definitions (earlier email). We have to stop somewhere... Best, Kathy On 4/29/2025 10:06 AM, Anne ICANN via SubPro-IRT wrote: Thanks Marc. Re brand licensees, another reason not to exclude them from .brand applications is that some companies choose to hold all trademarks (and other IP) in an IP holding company and then license these brands individually to particular operating subsidiaries of the parent company. There are strategic legal reasons for this licensing that serve risk management goals and the operating subs should not be disqualified from running .brand TLDs. Maybe we just need to make sure the license extends through the full contracting period of the TLD (ten years.) Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>> wrote: My comments to Spec 13 in the attached. In sum: 1. In section 2, ICANN should not be able to later reasonably determine that a TLD no longer qualifies as a .BRAND for the same reasons that an arbitration panel overturned such decision [cid:image003.png@01DBB8FF.AC0DD300] 1. There is no Section 3 – it goes from Section 2 to Section 4. 1. As I discussed previously on the list, why should individual licensees be excluded from possible registrants if they meet the other requirements? I am guessing the concern is to avoid ROs from claiming Spec 13 status and then offering registrations to anyone. But that does not seem to be a valid concern because there is also the requirement that the trademark license “is for the use of such trademark in the regular course of that entity’s business outside of the provision of Registry Services, and is not primarily for the purpose of enabling registration or use of domain names in the TLD.” There are a number of brands where individual persons might be legitimate trademark licensees and need to use the trademark (and a domain name in the .brand TLD) as par of their regular business. For example, Realtors or individual insurance or other brokers working for a large company. Best regards, Marc H. Trachtenberg Shareholder Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601 T +1 312.456.1020 M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/> | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [cid:image002.png@01DBB8FF.AE7276F0] From: Karla Hakansson via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 6:17 PM To: subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org> Subject: [SubPro-IRT] NxR Base RA: SubPro Meeting #135 *EXTERNAL TO GT* Hello SubPro IRT, We will cover the following topics regarding the Next Round Base RA in meeting #135 tomorrow, 29 April: 1. Name Collision Report Handling, Spec 6, Sec 6.3.1 & 6.3.2, 2. Specification 13 3. Specification 14 Attached please find the redlines we will review. Also, the incorrect document is posted on the SubPro IRT wiki from our discussion on Recommendation 36.4. Until we resolve, please fine the correct redline we reviewed in meeting #134 on Thursday, 24 April. Regards, Karla _______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list -- subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to subpro-irt-leave@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ 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.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/policy__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!BkNhAIfa921KJHmEY4um7LLlikSrK_NGztojDfie9qceaJaPGBPC5-q9CxvWFDxJIs43D-Je_-3CLJU9YvuyIWU$>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/tos__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!BkNhAIfa921KJHmEY4um7LLlikSrK_NGztojDfie9qceaJaPGBPC5-q9CxvWFDxJIs43D-Je_-3CLJU91I6eMl8$>). 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. _______________________________________________ SubPro-IRT mailing list -- subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to subpro-irt-leave@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ 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.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/policy__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!BkNhAIfa921KJHmEY4um7LLlikSrK_NGztojDfie9qceaJaPGBPC5-q9CxvWFDxJIs43D-Je_-3CLJU9YvuyIWU$>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/tos__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!BkNhAIfa921KJHmEY4um7LLlikSrK_NGztojDfie9qceaJaPGBPC5-q9CxvWFDxJIs43D-Je_-3CLJU91I6eMl8$>). 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.
participants (4)
-
Anne ICANN -
Karla Hakansson -
Kathy Kleiman -
trachtenbergm＠gtlaw.com