[gnso-sti] Questions raised on Clearinghouse Strawman; consensus?
- To: GNSO STI <gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-sti] Questions raised on Clearinghouse Strawman; consensus?
- From: Kathy Kleiman <Kathy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:56:12 -0500
Many things passed quickly during the last Clearinghouse discussion,
including many new ideas,
presented by one person, disagreed by another, and then written up, we
found, as consensus.
So let's go back to a few issues we do not think have been decided, and
may block the process,
which, has come so far.
A. Marks need to come from jurisdictions a substantive evaluation and
verification. (That was an IRT idea.)
B. Response to #2 and #6:
We/ NCSG does not support any specific requirement or language for
ancillary services. **Content of the Clearinghouse
is a policy issue, not an implementation detail.** We support ICANN
contracting for a separate and independent Trademark Clearinghouse
along the lines we discussed; all other databases and ancillary services
are a market detail.
C. Response to #7:
We don't recall discussing pre-registration for URS, and certainly not
to any level close to consensus. Detail sought.
Great concern about the use of "consensus" here:
#6 Voluntary Pre-Launch Use of the Trademark Clearinghouse
Mandatory use to support pre-launch of a registry for either a sunrise
process or a IP Claims Service (no requirement that a registry use
both); Sunrise registrations should allow for specialized gTLDs to
restrict eligibility for sunrise registrations to fit the purpose of the
registry (example, .shoe could restrict sunrise to only trademark
registrations in class of goods and services related to shoes). No
requirement of use by existing registries since the mandatory use is
only for pre-launch activities.
#7 Voluntary Use of the Trademark Clearinghouse Post-Launch
Voluntary use as a pre-registration process for URS; no requirement
that the TC be used to support post-launch IP Claims;
TC may provide post launch IP Claims Service as a separate nonexclusive
service, with implementation details left to Staff to address possible
monopoly and competition concerns (such as making information available
to competitors); Report to indicate that registries should consider
providing post launch IP Claims protection for common law rights if it
fits the registry's purpose.