ARI Registry Services Reply Comment – Implementing Rights Protection Mechanisms in the Name Collision Mitigation Framework

[Yasmin Omer <Yasmin.Omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ARI Registry Services Reply Comment – Implementing Rights Protection Mechanisms 
in the Name Collision Mitigation Framework
ARI Registry Services welcomes the opportunity to provide the following 
comments in reply to public comments on the paper titled ‘Implementing Rights 
Protection Mechanisms in the Name Collision Mitigation Framework’.
Whilst ARI Registry Services supports the existing approach for names that are 
released from the SLD Block List referred to in the paper as the “Status Quo” 
and is therefore opposed to a ‘secondary sunrise’, ARI Registry Services takes 
this opportunity to reply to comments aimed at responding to the five questions 
raised in the paper regarding the implementation of a ‘secondary Sunrise’ 
period.

a.       What is the appropriate notification to be sent to the trademark 
holders for registrations during a secondary sunrise? As per the current 
Sunrise requirements, the new gTLD registry notifies the TMCH of registration 
of the domain names during the Sunrise Period, so that matching rights holders 
in the TMCH also receive notification. Should this mechanism be present during 
a secondary Sunrise?
ARI Registry Services is not opposed to the use of the abovementioned mechanism 
(LORDN) by registry operators to notify the TMCH of registration of domain 
names during the Sunrise Period. However, ARI Registry Services is opposed to 
any requirement that imposes the same technical implementation mechanisms that 
must be applied during the initial Sunrise period for the following reasons:

·         Registry operators and registrars may find it simpler to accept 
registrations via manual handling rather than through EPP;

·         Such a requirement will introduce significant effort for all parties 
involved and these efforts will undoubtedly result in costs that will 
ultimately be borne by the registrants;

·         The low number of Sunrise Registrations to date simply does not 
justify the imposition of this requirement.
Furthermore, references to ‘secondary sunrise periods’ in the ICANN staff paper 
are misleading in that they imply that the implementation of such will mirror 
that of the initial Sunrise period.

b.      Should there be a minimum/maximum duration of the secondary Sunrise 
period? What time period requirements would be appropriate?
ARI Registry Services is not opposed to a set mandatory duration of 30 days for 
the ‘secondary Sunrise period’ irrespective of whether this is a ‘Start Date’ 
or ‘End Date’ Sunrise period.

c.       What type of notice should registries be required to provide in 
advance of a secondary Sunrise? Should there be a requirement for date and 
registration requirements to be published in a similar manner as the original 
Sunrise period?
ARI Registry Services is not opposed to the provision of 10 days advance notice 
by registry operators regarding a ‘secondary Sunrise period’. However, ARI 
Registry Services is opposed to any requirement that restricts registry 
operators to commencing the ‘secondary Sunrise period’ at a specific point in 
time e.g. in batches.

d.      Should the registry be required to report its secondary Sunrise to 
ICANN? How does ICANN confirm that registries are complying with the 
requirements?
ARI Registry Services is not opposed to a requirement mandating that registry 
operators provide ICANN with notification of the start and end date of any 
‘secondary Sunrise period’.

e.      What type of dispute resolution processes should be in place for a 
secondary Sunrise?
ARI Registry Services is not opposed to the extension of the existing SDRP to a 
‘secondary Sunrise period’


Regards,

[Description: Description: Description: ARI Logo]YASMIN OMER
Compliance & Policy Manager

ARI REGISTRY SERVICES
Melbourne | Los Angeles
P  +61 3 9866 3710
E  yasmin.omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:yasmin.omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
W  www.ariservices.com<http://www.ariservices.com/>

Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/ARIservices>

The information contained in this communication is intended for the named 
recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged 
and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must 
not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have 
received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system 
and notify us immediately.