FW: Intel Corporation's Comment re Proposed Strawman Solution and Limited Preventative Registrations

[Karen Lentz <karen.lentz@xxxxxxxxx>]

Forwarding on behalf of Kelly Smith, Intel Corporation

From: Smith, Kelly W [mailto:kelly.w.smith@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 10:14 AM
To: tmch-strawman@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Intel Corporation's Comment re Proposed Strawman Solution and Limited 
Preventative Registrations

Intel is pleased to provide comments in support of the "Strawman Solution" and 
the Limited Preventative Registration proposal.  Both are necessary 
implementation measures to support ICANN's stated policies of protecting 
third-party IP rights and preventing consumer confusion.

Regarding the Strawman Solution, Intel supports the requirement for a notice 
period in advance of each new gTLD sunrise period but believes that 30 days' 
notice is insufficient.  As new gTLDs are launched, Intel will need to 
determine whether one or more of its trademarks should be registered in each of 
the (potentially) hundreds of new extensions open for public registration.  To 
take advantage of the sunrise periods offered by the new gTLDs, as a practical 
matter Intel will need at least 60 days' notice to reasonably prepare its 
sunrise registrations.   A 90 day notice period would be even more reasonable.  
In addition, Intel supports the extension of the Trademark Claims service to 90 
days and the suggested "Claims 2" period to further prevent infringing 
registrations (and the resulting likelihood of consumer confusion and harm).

Intel strongly supports the proposal for a Limited Preventative Registration 
option.  The INTEL trademark is well-known worldwide and has been deemed the 
8th most valuable brand in the world.  Historically, Intel has registered the 
INTEL trademark  during the sunrise period for each new gTLD and ccTLD, where 
possible.  In many cases, these domain name registrations are purely defensive 
(i.e. filed merely to prevent cybersquatting and resulting consumer confusion). 
 With hundreds of new "open" gTLDs offering domain names to the public, it will 
be cost prohibitive for Intel to defensively register the INTEL trademark (not 
to mention its other marks) during the sunrise periods of the new extensions.  
To illustrate, if INTEL was to utilize the Sunrise period for its INTEL 
trademark in 500 of the new open gTLDs, assuming a cost of $300 per sunrise 
application, this cost would reach $150,000.  Multiply that sum by even a small 
number of Intel's other registered trademarks, and Intel's cost of sunrise 
registrations in the new gTLD rollout will exceed half a million dollars.  Not 
only is that amount well beyond Intel's budget, we are also concerned that 
smaller companies with registered marks that have a much smaller budget for 
such defensive registrations would effectively be excluded from taking full 
advantage of the sunrise registration process.  If available, Intel would take 
full advantage of a low-cost, Limited Preventative Registration option for 
those extensions for which its only purpose of registration is a defensive one. 
 Such Limited Preventative Registrations represent a more cost-effective and 
reasonable measure to protect Intel's trademark rights and prevent against 
consumer confusion resulting from infringing and abusive registrations.

Regards,

Kelly W. Smith
Senior Attorney, Trademarks & Brands
Intel Corporation