<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: FW: [gnso-igo-ingo] Qualification Criteria - common ground?
- To: "'Evan Leibovitch'" <evan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: FW: [gnso-igo-ingo] Qualification Criteria - common ground?
- From: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:33:06 +0000
Evan,
As you yourself have acknowledged, we are considering a spectrum of potential
protections, not merely so-called “blocking mechanisms.” We are not talking
here about qualification criteria for a reserved name (or any other particular
RPM), we are talking about a threshold qualification for further consideration
by the WG. We won’t even get to the question of whether reserved names as a
particular RPM should require a particular set of criteria if our criteria are
so high that all INGOs save two are eliminated at the gates, or what the role
of “harm and abuse” is.
Furthermore, my concern is not just that the bar is too high, but that it is
arbitrary in either of these options.
From: evanleibovitch@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:evanleibovitch@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Evan Leibovitch
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:11 PM
To: Shatan, Gregory S.
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FW: [gnso-igo-ingo] Qualification Criteria - common ground?
Hi Gregory.
On 13 February 2013 13:05, Shatan, Gregory S.
<GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I am deeply troubled by both Option A and “Option C” (to use Avri’s term for
the disjunctive “or” version of Option A). Unless we adopt broad meanings to
both the first and second prongs of these option, either of these options will
have the effect of eliminating virtually every INGO (other than the IOC and the
RCRC) from our further consideration, and may have similar effects for IGOs as
well.
Without a clear and non-hypothetical demonstration of harm and abuse, there is
excellent reason to have a high bar regarding the provision of blocking
mechanisms that are not even available to international trademark holders.
On other words, I'm not troubled by this.
- Evan
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may
well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice
of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete
this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your
cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that,
unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in
this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to
be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under
the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2)
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters
addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|