WED Registry Agreement Amendment - Introduction of Third Level Domain Sales

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

Although I am President of the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC), I 
submit these comments in a personal capacity.  The IPC will not be submitting 
comments, despite member interest, because of member overload.

I agree with most of Michele Neylon's June 13 comment.

The .wed registry is still advertising third-level domains for sale despite the 
fact that the required Registry Agreement Amendment has not yet been executed 
and is still subject to public comment.

Just as the .wed registry appears not to have consulted with the Registrar 
Stakeholder Group, it also hasn't consulted with the Intellectual Property 
Constituency.  Indeed, the RSEP request itself states that the proposed 
Registry Service (sale of third-level domains) raises "no" intellectual 
property considerations because "third-level extensions will be generic terms." 
 A cursory review of the 11,000 third-level domain list discloses numerous 
terms that are registered trademarks.  For example, BEBE is the subject of US 
Reg. Nos. 1652462, 2289914, and 2038435; and FOREVER is the subject of US Reg. 
Nos. 3379685, 4180540, and 4242135.  It seems likely that a more thorough 
review would disclose many more.

The intended scope of the third-level sales and the registry's nominal efforts 
to consult with GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies does suggest the 
appearance, as Mr. Neylon states, of an attempt to circumvent established 
policies within the new TLD program.

At a minimum, further consultation with the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and 
Constituencies and an analysis to confirm that there is no attempt to 
circumvent established policies within the new TLD program appear warranted 
before the proposed Registry Amendment is approved.

Sincerely yours,
Kristina Rosette