The next meeting of the new IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Working Group is scheduled on Wednesday 10th December 2014 at 17:00 UTC (09:00 PST, 12:00 EST, 17:00 London, 18:00 CET).
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/p5h6taa
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/crp/
Agenda:
- Roll Call/Updates to SOI
- Update from WG chairs
- Discuss WG approach (e.g. via small groups or other method) and brainstorming on Work Plan question: "Develop potential considerations (e.g. qualifying requirements, authentication criteria and appeal processes) for IGOs that would be relevant to their use of dispute resolution proceedings (existing or new)”
- Next step
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-access-20141210-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-igo-ingo-crp-access-10dec14-en.pdf
Attendees:
George Kirikos - Individual
Petter Rindforth – IPC
Phil Corwin – BC
Kristine Dorrain- Individual
Nat Cohen - BC
Mason Cole – RySG
David Maher – RySG
Paul Keating – NCUC
Val Sherman - IPC
David Heasley - IPC
Susan Kawaguchi – BC
Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP
Apologies:
Mary Wong
ICANN staff:
Berry Cobb
Steve Chan
Nathalie Peregrine
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Wednesday, 10 December 2014:
Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting on the 10 December 2014
George Kirikos:Hi everyone.
George Kirikos:Is there a meeting next week? I believe Hannukah starts next Tuesday, although I'm not sure if that'll affect any of our participants/members.
Paul Keating:hello all.
George Kirikos:Hi Paul.
Petter Rindforth:We will discuss that during this meeting - we plan to have just a short update meeting
Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all, sorry I am late.
George Kirikos:Welcome, Osvaldo.
Philip Corwin:Hello all
Steve Chan:sorry all, let me put up the current version
George Kirikos:Petter: were you able to clarfiy the email to the IPC mailing list?
Nathalie Peregrine:Nat Cohen is on the audio bridge
George Kirikos:It looks like it hasn't been sent to the Business Constituency yet (their mailing list is public athttp://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/ )
Paul Keating:I think the registrars should recieve a copy as well since any change to the UDRP would require a change to the RA.
George Kirikos:Paul might be on mute?
George Kirikos:*6 to mute/unmute, I think.
Nathalie Peregrine:@ Paul, you need to activate your AC mic, as you are not on the audio bridge
Philip Corwin:I believe the plan is to send to all SGs and Acs, including registrar SG
Paul Keating:I will through my MAC to the sea. Can you see my and George's comment.
George Kirikos:I think it's going to every constituency, correct?
Paul Keating:thank you.
Philip Corwin:I have not seen on BC list yet, public or private
Paul Keating:I will get this right one day :-(
George Kirikos:I had another question? (re the update?)
George Kirikos:Did we get anything back from the IGOs or the GAC yet?
Steve Chan:Confirmed, the letter was sent to the BC. That chair may not have circulated to the wider group yet.
Philip Corwin:Steve, when you get a chance please circulate the finakl version of the letter as sent out so everyone can have for their records? Thanks
George Kirikos:Thanks Steve.
Steve Chan:@phil, sure thing
George Kirikos:http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2002/d2002-0222.html
Paul Keating:But the UDRP is founded in trademark law as noted by the WIPO White Paper.
Paul Keating:Any inclusion of non-trademark rights would require a substantive change to the 1st Element of the Policy.
Paul Keating:Phil, There is also nothing to stop UDRP Panels from treating their names as if Common Law Trademarks....... I see no reason to deal with this given the substantial nature of changes that would be required.
George Kirikos:The UNITAID example I gave last week also had a TM: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2012-1922
Kristine Dorrain-NAF:I don't speak for IGOs but I suspect a concern is phishing. a legitimate business owning and operating IDEA.com is very different from some random person using it to divert funds, etc.
Paul Keating:Peter, that is not a correct statement. Those UDRPs dealing with famous names were based ONLY on trademark.
Paul Keating:I agree with George.
Jay Chapman:agree with George as well
Paul Keating:@Kristine, such issues are really well beyond the scope of a UDRP.
George Kirikos:It would be more of an anti-impersonation policy. I think that can still be handled via the UDRP.
Paul Keating:Phil, Janu 6/7 however is a very big day in Europe (Epiphany) and is actually more important than Christmas for many people.
Kristine Dorrain-NAF:UDRP routinely handles phishing cases. If the IGO has a common law mark and the domain name owner is targeting that mark, even with an arguably "generic" word like IDEA, a high number of panelists are going to transfer that name to stop the harm.
Paul Keating:@Kristine, yes but only as a function of finding bad faith and lack of LI. It is not used as a substitute for finding a trademark.
George Kirikos:Yes. It won't stop folks from phishing via "fake-hhhh.biz" for IDEA (to give an example), since "IDEA" doesn't appear within the domain.
Paul Keating:I agree with Phil
Kristine Dorrain-NAF:I was not saying a new policy is needed. I just answering the question about why an IGO might go after something "generic" like IDEA. Just one reason.
George Kirikos:(i.e. they couldn't get relief for that via the UDRP). But, that'd be a very different DRP.
Kristine Dorrain-NAF:correct. UDRP does not deal with content. Which is a different problem. :)
Paul Keating:I suggest we use next week to focus on Sov. Immunity and deal with teh trademark issue in January
Paul Keating:I am sorry but I must go to a client board call. Thank you to all and have a great weekend.
George Kirikos:I think Paul Tattersfield had checked a few already.
George Kirikos:(via TMView, etc.)
George Kirikos:Have a great day, everyone.
Mason Cole:So long
Kristine Dorrain-NAF:Thanks everyong
Petter Rindforth:Thanks to you all!
