<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Hearst Communications, Inc.'s comments regarding the Draft Applicant Guidebook Version 3 for launch of new gTLDs Project
- To: <3gtld-guide@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Hearst Communications, Inc.'s comments regarding the Draft Applicant Guidebook Version 3 for launch of new gTLDs Project
- From: "Nooger, Daniel A" <dnooger@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:37:13 -0500
November 19, 2009
Dear Sirs:
Hearst Communications, Inc. offers the following comments regarding
the Draft Applicant Guidebook version 3 for launch of the new gTLDs project:
1. The elimination from the DAG 3rd draft of the previously
proposed Globally Protected Marks List in favor of having a Trademark
Clearinghouse, URS and rapid takedown systems is going to shift the burden and
expense of protecting and policing trademark owner’s marks onto trademarks
owners and increase that burden substantially.
2. Apparently each time an application is filed which appears
to be a potential infringement the trademark owner will have to bring (and pay
for filing) a separate new case.
3. This will quite likely lead to a situation in which
trademark owners will have use watch services similar to trademark watching
service to monitor filings by all of the registrars. Although the proposed
Trademark Clearinghouse structure will offer a Watch Service it does not appear
to have any enforcement mechanism to prevent potential infringing applicants
from filing potentially infringing gTLD applications.
4. In addition, there do not appear to be safeguards in place
to potentially prevent the same, or very similar claims, from having to be
repeatedly litigated.
5. In addition, the concerns raised in Hearst’s previous
comments, which going by comments submitted by other companies, are shared by a
number of companies, have not been fully or satisfactorily addressed, as
follows:
a) Given the substantial number of issues, both in the IP/ Trademark rights
areas, as well as in other areas, in which ICANN has noted that further study
is needed, ICANN should strongly consider pushing back the launch date for the
initial round of registrations of new gTLDs until these issues have been
thoroughly addressed. In the alternative, the initial roll-out for such new
gTLDs should be limited to community-based and / or geographic gTLDs, and
should not include so-called “open” gTLDs until the overarching issues have
been thoroughly reviewed and the necessary protective structures put into
place. As the IRT Final Draft Report of May 29, 2009 itself noted: “if new
gTLDs are launched, it could make sense for ICANN to ask a team qualified in
trademark protection to take a fresh look at the impact of our recommendations
after 18-24 months to determine whether they can be improved.”, and, quoting
ICANN Chair Peter Dengate-Thrush, “
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|