RE: [gnso-pro-wg] NEW APPROACH TO WORK OF WG

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

Are our NomCom, NCUC, and Registrar Constituency members satified with
this list of issues?
 
Kristina
 
 From: owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:20 AM
To: gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-pro-wg] NEW APPROACH TO WORK OF WG



        A number of us are struggling with trying to come up with a
perfect questionnaire to send out to obtain data.  However, don't we
really already know what answers we are going to get from the questions?


         

        As a registry that has introduced (either directly or
indirectly) several new TLDs including .biz, .us and .travel among
others, I personally believe the results of the questionnaire will show
that:

         

        1)       Trademark owners and businesses believe some sort
intellectual property rights mechanism is needed in the introduction of
new gTLDs.  

        2)       Any mechanism that is introduced should take all steps
possible to minimize fraudulent or abusive domain name registrations
during the launch process.

        3)       Each of the processes introduced prior, whether Sunrise
or IP claim, had issues with their implementation and these issues need
to be resolved for any future launch.  Implementation issues involve (a)
verification of claims/registrations, (b) dispute resolution mechanisms,
(c) which marks are deserving of protections, etc.

        4)       Registries believe that the existing mechanisms are too
costly (both in terms of business, operations, support and legal) and
present a burden to introducing new gTLDs.

        5)       Defensive Registrations are issues both to trademark
owners and to domain name registries.  For trademark owners and
businesses, defensive registrations can amount to a significant cost to
their companies and to registries, purely defensive registrations do
nothing to enhance the utility of the new TLD - they merely cerate a
carbon copy of other TLDs.  Contrary to what some believe IP Launch
processes are not a boon to registries and amount for a small
insignifanct portion of the total domains registered in a particular
TLD.

         

        Given the facts above, which I believe most would concede in
some form, shouldn't we focus on creatively brainstorming new solutions
to these issues (and there may be others), rather than spending our time
on a survey/questionnaire where we already know the outcome.

         

        Maybe this is too radical, but I thought I would toss it out
there.

         

        Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
        Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & Business Development 

        NeuStar, Inc. 
        Loudoun Tech Center 
        46000 Center Oak Plaza 
        Sterling, VA 20166 
        p: (571) 434-5772 
        f: (571) 434-5735 
        e-mail: Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>  

         

        PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  The information contained
in this e-mail communication and any attached documentation may be
privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is
intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s).  If the reader
or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, or an
employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for
delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any review, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this
communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify us by return e-mail
and promptly delete the original electronic e-mail communication and any
attached documentation.  Receipt by anyone other than the intended
recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client or work-product
privilege.