[gnso-sti] Status of Next Draft
- To: "'GNSO STI'" <gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-sti] Status of Next Draft
- From: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 15:41:13 -0800
Thank you all for your comments and suggested revisions. I am awaiting a few
more comments that I am told should arrive by tomorrow morning. If possible,
please have all of your comments in by 12:00 ET tomorrow, and I'll send a
revised document in the afternoon.
There appears to be some open issues still unresolved. My question for each
of you is whether we should schedule one more call on Wednesday morning to
finalize the report.
Please let me know if you think that is necessary, and I'll have Gisella send
around a doodle to determine the best time for a call.
Senior Policy Counselor
From: Kathy Kleiman [mailto:Kathy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 4:03 PM
To: Margie Milam
Cc: 'GNSO STI'
Subject: Re: [gnso-sti] NCSG edits
Attached is the NCSG's requests for changes to the text of the excellent STI
Report which Margie has drafted.
I hope you will find our edits consistent with the positions we have taken all
along. We offer them to further clarify and explain these positions.
Our edits fall into two broad categories:
1. changing "should" to "shall." Especially where there are issues involving
notice and due process, we feel strongly that the word "shall" should be used
as these are protections for the registrant we negotiated together.
2. adding in specific language regarding the notice and due process
requirements as we understand the discussion and agreement.
All changes in the attached document are shown via "Track Changes." These
include brief changes to the Background, opening paragraphs of each section and
One further change that we support, and have incorporated, is the change of IP
Claims to TM Claims. I think this was Alan's edit and we agree -- and note that
the STI has been using the term TM Claims in our discussion for some time.
We hope these edits, and all our edits, advance us to the end game.
Attached for your review is the second draft of the STI Report, that includes
the Trademark Clearinghouse and URS recommendations.
Although I have received a number of comments already to the first draft, this
version does not address any of them except to change the references of "broad
consensus" to "rough consensus." I thought it would be more appropriate to
wait for additional comments before circulating the next draft.
Senior Policy Counselor