RE: [council] Letter from Fadi Chehade (was FW: TMCH)

["Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Volker,
I don't totally agree with your position, I think that some of the changes 
proposed in the Strawman Solution for the TMCH are clearly implementation and 
not policy.  As an example, adding a 30-day notice period in advanced to the 
Sunrise Period doesn't change the original proposed approach for the Sunrise 
Period or its results.  Also, extending to 90 days the Trademark Claims period 
doesn't seem as a policy change.   For me these changes are just implementation 
changes.
The rest of the proposal does look as policy changes and in that regard a 
totally share your position.
This doesn't mean that I don't support the proposal; I think it has lots of 
merit but should go through the established processes.
Best regards,
Osvaldo Novoa


________________________________
De: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] En 
nombre de Volker Greimann
Enviado el: Miércoles, 12 de Diciembre de 2012 15:20
Para: Jonathan Robinson
CC: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: Re: [council] Letter from Fadi Chehade (was FW: TMCH)

Dear Jonathan,

I believe I have already clarified my position on these proposals. This 
position has been further supported by a review  of preceeding policy decisions 
on these matters which have shown that not only are these mostly matters of 
policy but also that the demands proposed by the strawman are to a very large 
degree in direct contradiction to previous policy decisions.

It should therefore be our position that we refer back to the earlier policy 
decisions on these issues and reject any changes to these positions that have 
not come through an established policy making process. ICANN should not be 
subjected to more of these suddenly policy revisions in closed backroom 
meetings and rather rely on its established processes.

If that means that these proposals will not be ready for prime-time at the time 
of the launch of the new TLDs, so be it. I cannot in my best consciousness 
support caving in to speciality interests to the detriment of the community of 
the whole, of registries, registrars and registrants.

Best,

Volker


All,

A reminder that this item is on our agenda for discussion next week.  I believe 
that we need to respond to Fadi in as constructive, well-considered and 
comprehensive a manner as possible.

Therefore, please can you personally consider the letter, the issues it raises 
and ensure that these are discussed with your respective groups so that you are 
in a position to discuss the Council's response.

Any contributions to the list in advance of December 20th most welcome.

Noting:

"I am seeking policy guidance from the GNSO Council on two items as part of the 
next steps for the implementation of the TMCH, namely, the Strawman Proposal 
and the IPC/BC proposal for limited defensive registrations"

And

"... a request from the New GTLD Program Committee's April resolution where it 
requested "the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive 
registrations at the second level should be undertaken"(2012.04.10.NG2)"

Thank-you.


Jonathan



From: Fadi Chehade [mailto:fadi.chehade@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 04 December 2012 22:47
To: Jonathan Robinson
Cc: Margie Milam; David Olive
Subject: TMCH

Dear Jonathan,

As reported in my recent blog on the Trademark Clearinghouse (see: 
http://blog.icann.org/2012/11/a-follow-up-to-our-trademark-clearinghouse-meetings/),
 the recent implementation TMCH related discussions led to the development of a 
strawman model  to address some of the proposed improvements requested by the 
BC/IPC.   I am very pleased with the efforts shown by the participants in these 
discussions, as they reflect a willingness to explore improvements to the TMCH 
and the rights protection mechanisms available in new GTLDs.

I am seeking policy guidance from the GNSO Council on two items as part of the 
next steps for the implementation of the TMCH, namely, the Strawman Proposal 
and the IPC/BC proposal for limited defensive registrations.   Each of these 
documents are posted for public comment 
(see:http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/tmch-strawman-30nov12-en.htm) 
to allow the ICANN community the opportunity to comment on these proposals.  
Specifically, policy guidance is sought on the portion that pertains to the 
expansion of the scope of the trademark claims, although comments on any aspect 
of the Strawman Model is welcome in the event the Council is interested in 
broadening its response.  The specific proposal is that:

Where there are domain labels that have been found to be the subject of 
previous abusive registrations (e.g., as a result of a UDRP or court 
proceeding), a limited number (up to 50) of these may be added to a 
Clearinghouse record (i.e., these names would be mapped to an existing record 
for which the trademark has already been verified by the Clearinghouse).  
Attempts to register these as domain names will generate the Claims notices as 
well as the notices to the rights holder.

Not included in the Strawman Model is the IPC/BC proposal for a limited 
preventative registrations.  In general, there was not support among non-IPC/BC 
participants for solutions to the issue of second level defensive registrations 
among the participants in the TMCH meetings.   After hearing concerns regarding 
this issue, members of the IPC/BC provided a description of a preventative 
mechanism, the "Limited Preventative Registration," which has also been 
published for public comment.    As this issue is relevant to a request from 
the New GTLD Program Committee's April resolution where it requested "the GNSO 
to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second 
level should be undertaken"(2012.04.10.NG2), I am seeking GNSO Council feedback 
on this IPC/BC proposal as well.

It would be ideal if the GNSO Council could take up these issues at its 
December meeting.

Finally, addressing some of the criticisms on the process used by Staff in 
convening these meetings, I hope that you can appreciate that Staff is not 
circumventing the GNSO processes. The Strawman Model and my blog posting always 
clarified that this request to the GNSO Council was coming.  One of my goals as 
CEO is to enhance collaboration in the ICANN community as it tackles difficult 
issues.   I truly believe that the development of strawman proposals on this 
and other issues can be a useful tool to inform policy and implementation 
discussions.   I hope that you will consider this request in that light.

We look forward to the Council's reply to this request.


Best Personal Regards,

Fadi Chehade
President and CEO
ICANN




--

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.



Mit freundlichen Grüßen,



Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / 
www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen 
Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder 
Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht 
nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder 
telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.



--------------------------------------------



Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.



Best regards,



Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / 
www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is 
addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this 
email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an 
addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the 
author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.







________________________________
El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido únicamente 
al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede ser confidencial. 
Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor notifique al remitente 
respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine inmediatamente el e-mail y los 
posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier 
utilización, difusión o copia de este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad 
que no sean las específicas destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna 
responsabilidad con respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida 
incumpliendo nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información


This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely for the 
addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform the sender 
immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as the attached files. 
Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any person or entity that is not 
the specific addressee(s) is prohibited. ANTEL is not responsible for any 
communication emitted without respecting our Information Security Policy.