ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

USPS Comments on Strawman Solution and LPRs

  • To: "'tmch-strawman@xxxxxxxxx'" <tmch-strawman@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: USPS Comments on Strawman Solution and LPRs
  • From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 21:34:56 +0000

Comments are submitted on behalf of the United States Postal Service.

The United States Postal Service submits this comment in support of the 
proposal for Limited Preventative Registrations (LPRs).  LPRs will provide our 
organization and the public at large with long-term protection from false and 
misleading domain names and websites.  Without LPRs, the USPS will be forced to 
incur huge costs to register domain names we do not want in hundreds of new 
gTLDs, at prohibitive expense, to protect the public and our reputation.  The 
public entrusts its private and personally identifiable information to the 
Postal Service on a daily basis.  Allowing registration of domains that mislead 
consumers into believing the domains originate with a trusted source (the 
Postal Service) will lead to great public harm in the form of phishing schemes 
and identity theft.    This will erode public confidence in the DNS system.

We also support the "Strawman Solution" proposal currently being considered in 
connection with the roll out of the new gTLDs but regarding “Claims 2”, the 
proposal as drafted is not sufficient.   Instead, the Trademark Clearinghouse 
should continue in perpetuity without diminishing the protection it offers.
Moreover, both the LPR and Strawman Proposal should allow for protection 
against domain names that, when taken together as a whole with terms combined 
before and after the dot, are identical to a registered trademark.  Examples 
This might be most easily accomplished in the present implementation phase in 
connection with the proposal to permit 50 variations of registered or abused 
trademarks to be entered into the Trademark Clearinghouse records.  For 
example, based on the USPS registered mark for Priority Mail®, the USPS should 
be able to qualify for IP Claims notification if there is a third party 
registration of the term “priority” at the second level of any proposed 
(dot)mail gTLD.  USPS should also have the option of preventing such a 
registration through the use of the LPR mechanism.

The USPS believes that the debate over policy versus implementation is not a 
meaningful one in the context of an impending launch of some 1900 new gTLDs. We 
understand that the existing Rights Protection Mechanisms were not developed 
pursuant to a Policy Development Process.   Further, numerous examples exist of 
the ICANN Board and staff making policy decisions during the implementation 
phase of the gTLD program.  For example, the ICANN Board decided to conduct a 
Prioritization Draw and to put IDNs first in the Draw.  Without expressing any 
opinion on the advisability of the Draw method, this was clearly a policy 

Another example is the decision to impose a March 13, 2013 deadline for filing 
of objections even though Initial Evaluations will not be published as of that 
date and GAC Advice will not be available as of that date.  This creates a huge 
burden of evaluating objections without adequate public information regarding 
the gTLD applications and could lead to a significant number of  objections due 
to unknown factors.

Lastly, numerous policy decisions have apparently been made in connection with 
the implementation of the Trademark Clearinghouse without adequate time for 
public comment.  Further, no Pilot Program to test the operation of the 
Trademark Clearinghouse before it goes live has been put forth.  The USPS, in 
addition to supporting the Strawman Solution (with the changes suggested above) 
and the LPRs, respectfully requests that after the TMCH is modified to 
accommodate LPRs and the Strawman Solution, ICANN launch a Pilot Program for 
the Trademark Clearinghouse in order to test its implementation and ability to 
function properly.   This step and any resulting adjustments will function to 
protect the interests of all stakeholders as well as improving ICANN’s 
reputation for smooth and effective implementation.  The TMCH is a system that 
could be very vulnerable to start-up “glitches”. A TMCH Pilot Program is 
therefore highly recommended.

[cid:985382721@15012013-0BC8]Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
Lewis and Roca LLP • Suite 700
One South Church Avenue • Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
Tel (520) 629-4428 • Fax (520) 879-4725
AAikman@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxx> • 
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information
intended only for the individual or entity named within the message.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is prohibited.  If this communication
was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original 


For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to 

Phoenix (602)262-5311           Reno (775)823-2900
Tucson (520)622-2090            Albuquerque (505)764-5400
Las Vegas (702)949-8200         Silicon Valley (650)391-1380

  This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying 
to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone.

  In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that 
if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or 
written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of 
avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.

GIF image

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy