ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Response to Markmontiers comment

  • To: comments-rpm-requirements-06aug13@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Response to Markmontiers comment
  • From: Toren Chikalut <tochikalut@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 21:58:54 +0300

Dear Icann,

Please see below my response to Markmontier with regard to their comment on
the recently published draft of registry Rights Protection Mechanism (RPM)

 Contrary to Markmoniters comment, Third parties can and  should have
priority registration rights over validated entries in the Trademark
Clearinghouse in the following instances:

1.      Geo names relevant to their specific communities

2.       Any domain related to their specific community

*3.      **Generic domains and IDN generic domains*

These names should be allowed to be allocated to third parties and can and
should have priority over the TMCH. This should allow the registries to
create founder programs.

These requested changes would not diminish effective intellectual property

There has to be:

The ability to restrict trademarks geographically

The ability to restrict trademarks that are *generic* names.

My request should be supported not just by registries but by all IP
Representatives. We all agree that the idea is to protect the TM owners.
That will be done.

However there is no reason to allow the TMCH to be gamed as done in the .EU
launch and other instances.  In those cases companies entered TM's on
generic terms within the Sunrise period, and got those names. Those names
should not have been allowed to be entered into the Sunrise period,  and
probably should not have been given a TM in the first place. Obviously
their TM's give them rights to the specific name with a graphic, picture or
some additional word.

Registries delegate a domain, a name, a word and not a word with a mark,
graphic etc...  Hence those TM owners in reality have NO rights whatsoever
over any generic name on its own.  It's also been proven again and again
with RDNH (Reverse Domain name hijacking)   decisions against companies who
think they can use their TM to get at generic domains, which proves beyond
doubt that TM owners do not have any  rights over those domains.

Nonetheless, they have in the past gotten names during Sunrise period, and
now had managed to successfully manipulate the system and will be allowed
to enter the TMCH.  To solve that the simplest way, would be to..  not
allow generic terms into the TMCH.  That is not possible at this stage. So
the simpler solution is, *that registries will have a right to set aside
generic terms even if they are within the TMCH*. So generics like 777, or
books or police(.london) wouldn’t be able to be manipulated.

Reserved lists and founder programs are of generic names in general and of
domains related to the specific TLD or community. No Registry would set
aside a reserved list for a founder program etc. with names like Facebook,
Markmoniter, Google etc. They however will reserve generic names like
books,777, diamonds and others.   So real TM owners have nothing to worry
about. If Registries are stupid and set aside specific company names that
are not generic then they will get in trouble. So the IP groups should
support this request.

If some of those IP groups and companies like Microsoft, Markmoniter are
not trying to manipulate the system then they  have nothing to worry, and
no reason not to allow reserved lists. If on the other hand they are
planning to play dirty..why don’t they just speak out right now.. so we
know what they are up to??

In addition, it should be noted that once Icann allowed 100 names to be set
aside per Section 3.2 in the "The New gTLD Agreement"-then why not 200 or
10,000 to be set aside? If legally its accepted-then it shouldn’t matter
one way or the other.


Toren Chikalu

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy