RE: [gnso-sti] RE: Updated Strawman Proposal for Trademark Clearinghouse

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Margie.

 

I think there is not consensus on deleting this language from Sec. 6:
Delete: [Voluntary use by registries of database to support common law
rights, including "marks contained," for pre-launch protections. ]  Same
with the deletes from Sec. 4 re voluntary uses of the TMC, and the addition
of language to this effect in Sec. 2:  "TC Service Provider is  required to
maintain a separate TC database and cannot use the TC database to provide
ancillary services."

 

There certainly cannot be consensus that the TMC cannot be used in these
ways, even if a registry operator wishes.  What reason could exist for
denying additional protections or services in this regard, if a registry
wants to provide them?   The TMC, at minimum, must be designed to support
them.

 

Seems we still have a ways to go on Sec. 7 too.

 

The burden on everyone in this group is enormous, absence/silence cannot be
construed as agreement with any apparent consensus reached during any
particular call.

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

548 Market Street

San Francisco, CA  94104

 
<http://service.ringcentral.com/ringme/callback.asp?mbid=57178438,0,&referer
=http://rodenbaugh.com/contact> (415) 738-8087

 <http://rodenbaugh.com/> http://rodenbaugh.com

 

 

From: owner-gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Margie Milam
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 8:41 AM
To: 'GNSO STI'
Subject: [gnso-sti] RE: Updated Strawman Proposal for Trademark
Clearinghouse

 

Dear All,

 

Attached for your review is the updated Strawman Proposal for Trademark
Clearinghouse that takes into account our discussions on yesterday's call.

 

Best Regards,

 

Margie

 

_____________

 

Margie Milam

Senior Policy Counselor

ICANN

____________