Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO-INGO Consensus Call

["Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On the second point, I think it's important that we properly identify levels of 
consensus, whether for or against a proposal. We don't need to invert the 
language. We can simply say that there is consensus that the WG is opposed to 
the proposal. Calling this level of consensus "divergence" is inappropriate 
annd misleading.

Greg
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Device


From: Lelievre-Acosta, Berly [mailto:berly.lelievre-acosta@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 09:10 AM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>; brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx 
<brian.peck@xxxxxxxxx>; mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
ricardo.GUILHERME@xxxxxxx <ricardo.GUILHERME@xxxxxxx>; Teng, Joanne 
<joanne.teng@xxxxxxxx>; Sam.PALTRIDGE@xxxxxxxx <Sam.PALTRIDGE@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO-INGO Consensus Call

Dear Thomas and colleagues,
Further to our previous teleconference, we confirm that we do not support IGO 
Recommendation 5 since it does not provide an appropriate level of protection 
for IGO acronyms.  As indicated in our email of September 11, 2013, our 
opposition to IGO Recommendation 5 “concerns the lack of preventative 
second-level protection implied by the majority-proposed addition to the 
Trademark Clearinghouse”.
Regarding General Recommendation 4, we believe it is more appropriate to keep 
the wording as is and call it divergence.  The fact is that the members of the 
Working Group provided comments to General Recommendation 4 as it is currently 
drafted and it would be ill-advised to change its wording at this late stage.  
Considering the compilation of responses received from Working Group members, 
to invert the recommendation and then argue in favor of consensus is simply 
inappropriate.
Sincerely,
WIPO, OECD, UPU
Berly Lelievre Acosta and Jo Teng on behalf of Working Group representatives 
from WIPO, OECD, UPU


Berly Lelievre Acosta (Mr.) | Legal Officer | WIPO Arbitration and Mediation 
Center
34 chemin des Colombettes, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland | T +4122 338 
8247<tel:%2B4122%20338%208247> | E 
berly.lelievreacosta@xxxxxxxx<mailto:berly.lelievreacosta@xxxxxxxx> | 
www.wipo.int<http://www.wipo.int/>
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center is an international provider of 
non-profit services for the out-of-court resolution of commercial disputes. The 
Center specializes in cases arising out of intellectual property related 
transactions, in particular technology (e.g., licensing, R&D, distribution) and 
entertainment (e.g., copyright, production, formats).
WIPO arbitration, mediation and expert determination contract clauses: 
www.wipo.int/amc/en/clauses/<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/clauses/>
WIPO Internet domain name dispute resolution: 
www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/<http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/>




World Intellectual Property Organization Disclaimer: This electronic message 
may contain privileged, confidential and copyright protected information. If 
you have received this e-mail by mistake, please immediately notify the sender 
and delete this e-mail and all its attachments. Please ensure all e-mail 
attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or using.



* * *

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