[ispcp] FW: ISPC input to IRT on trademark issues in new gTLDs

["Tony Holmes" <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear ISPCP Constituency members

 

Please see the note received from Steve Metalitz below and the invitation to
provide input to the IRT, either as a Constituency or individually. In view
of the very short timescale I'd like to propose that members of the ISPCP
submit individual responses but copy them to the ISPCP mailing list.

 

Regards

 

Tony

 

  _____  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: 12 March 2009 14:59
To: tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: ISPC input to IRT on trademark issues in new gTLDs

 

Dear Tony: 
  
During its March 6 meeting in Mexico City, the ICANN Board of Directors
passed a resolution calling for the creation of an implementation
recommendation team to "develop and propose solutions to the overarching
issues of trademark protection in connection with the introduction of new
gTLDs." That resolution directs the implementation recommendation team to
"solicit input from the interested constituencies." (The full text of the
resolution is accessible at
http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-06mar09.htm.) 

  
The Board requested the GNSO's Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) to
convene an implementation recommendation team (IRT). Although the IPC is
still developing the time line for the IRT's work and the criteria for
membership on the IRT, the IPC wishes to begin soliciting input from the
constituencies. Accordingly, we write to request that input from the ISP
Constituency. 

In particular, we seek the ISP Constituency's proposals for solutions (new
or existing) to trademark protection issues that have been identified in
connection with the introduction of new gTLDs, concerns about such
solutions, and any other pertinent information your ISP Constituency
believes the IRT should have as it begins its work. We encourage you to be
as specific as possible. With regard to solutions, it is particularly
important that solutions be scalable and fair.  Finally, with the exception
of identifying support for and/or identifying concerns with specific
measures, it is not necessary to submit proposals about solutions that were
set forth in public comments on the first draft of the Draft Applicant
Guidebook; an IPC team is already hard at work identifying them. Those
proposals can be seen by reviewing the public comments sections at
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-en.htm#resources>, and
many of them are in short form in section IX of the comment analysis at
<http://icann.x.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/agv1-analysis-public-comments-
18feb09-en.pdf>.

  
Given the timetable set forth in the Board's resolution, we request your
input not later than March 25, 2009. If it is not possible under the
internal processes of the ISP Constituency to develop and approve any formal
submission in the requested time frame, individual submissions from ISP
Constituency members are permitted.  Your ISP Constituency comments will
have significant impact on the quality of the proposal and the speed that it
will adopted, so please carefully consider your input, make it as complete
as possible and try to respect the objectives of trying to protect consumers
from harm while creating a fair and scalable solution.

Please direct all submissions to ip-issues@xxxxxxxxx.  Also feel free to
forward this request if you are not the right person to deal with it on
behalf of your constituency. 

Thanks! 

Steve Metalitz, IPC president