[gnso-igo-ingo] preparation of tomorrow's call

[Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,
during tomorrow's call we should continue to exchange thoughts on potential 
protection mechanisms. 

You will remember that we used the following notes as a basis for our 
discussion last week:

***
4. Protections 

- RPMs do not permit all potentially protected organizations to use them 
- RPMs work in a curative way
- Reserved Names List does not allow for use by eligible parties

- Suggestion to open RPMs to all beneficiaries of the potential protections was 
welcome
- No agreement that there should be proactive protections.
- A model was discussed based on the idea of the TMCH, but permanent - a 
possible compromise?

- What should a mechanism look like to proactively protect, while avoiding 
over-breadth
- Exemption mechanism needed?
***

We started discussing the idea based on the TMCH idea and I would like to add a 
few ideas to that so we have something to start our discussion with:

Firstly, I guess it would make sense to call the discussed model other than 
TMCH as this caused some confusion in previous discussions. Why don't we call 
it Modified Reserved Names List Clearing House for the time being? 
Unfortunately, this would make the acronym MRNLCH, which is almost as complex 
as our work :-).

Remember, the idea is not to establish identical services as for trademarks, 
but to use the same general approach, which can be outlined as follows:

1. There is a central database into which a certain set of information is 
entered and 
2. There are services that use the data in the database.

If we apply this approach to our scenario, it could look as follows:

1. Central Database

The database would store a set of information, at the minimum:
- string(s)
- details of the entity requesting the entry
[...]

Such information would only be entered into the database after the data has 
been validated.

Application required?
Some participants were in support of the notion of requiring an application of 
the eligible party to have its designations entered into the database. Others 
said that protections should be granted per se. Shall we require an application?

Fee required?
We would need to determine (at some stage) whether a fee should be attached to 
the application (should an application be required).

Additional questions?
Further requirements could be established - which?
Different levels of protection could be offered depending on different criteria 
(applied for).

2. Services that use the data in the database

The general idea is that a service or different services (depending on whether 
there should be different levels of protection) is established that has to be 
used by all Registries or Registrars (depending on how it is designed) which 
ensures that all requests to create a domain registration (talking about the 
second level here) are checked against the central database. Depending on the 
result of the database query certain processes would be initiated.

- Proposed service:
I will describe a potential process below to facilitate our discussion. 

The service would be permanent and not only during the initial phase of after 
the launch of a TLD. The service would cover exact matches to the strings 
entered into the central database. 

a) A registrant wishes to register a domain name.

b) The string applied for is checked against the database.
aa) The result of the query is negative - the domain name is created
bb) The result of the query is positive - the registration is given special 
treatment (move to c).

c) Registration request for an exact match - options:
aa) The domain registration is denied (the customer requesting the registration 
is / is not informed accordingly)
bb) The domain registration request can proceed after the customer has received 
and confirmed something comparable to the Trademark Claims Service
cc) The domain registration is queued pending further processing (move to d).

d) Exemption procedure (Many members of the WG were in favor of establishing an 
exemption procedure, which is why I inserted it here):
aa) The domain registration would only be completed successfully, if the 
exemption procedure is passed by the customer trying to register the domain name
bb) A requirement could be that the customer trying to register the domain name 
can demonstrate the legal use of the designation
- Who establishes this?
- How is that demonstrated?
- Is an approval by the organization in question needed?
cc) If the criteria are fulfilled, the registration will proceed.

Additional questions: 
How shall contentions be resolved if an organization eligible to an entry in 
the central database and an eligible third party both apply for the same string?
Is "first come first served" applicable?
What if such contention happens during the Sunrise Period or during other 
stages of the phased roll-out?
Shall the organization with an entry in the central database prevail per se?


- Additional services:
One could also design a service for similar strings, but then we would need to 
deal with two different types of similarity - these are:
- strings containing the exact match
- strings consisting of or containing a variation of the exact match.


It might make sense to use the infrastructure of the TMCH for such service 
(should it make its way though all stages of adoption and implementation) as 
there might be synergies to save costs and avoid duplication, but that is not 
for us to decide. 

The above ideas would address protections at the second level, but not at the 
top level. We have also been tasked with looking at the top level, which is why 
we should also focus on that, too. 

Please note that the above structure shall stimulate discussion and help the WG 
in determining common ground to specify a potential consensus position. They do 
not reflect my personal preferences, but my understanding of potential ways 
forward and discussion points that I have picked up during our work on this 
issue.

Thanks,
Thomas