Dear all, > > I am attaching the latest version of the working strawmanı for the Trademark > Clearinghouse (TC) and the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) regarding the > new gTLDs. Here is where we are now: > > In June 2009, the IRT submitted its final report on rights protection > mechanisms, amongst which they suggested the creation of a Clearinghouse to > assist trademark owners in protecting their rights at the pre-launch > registration phase and a Uniform Rapid Suspension system for those egregious > cybersquatting instances. The report can be found at: > http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200906.html#irt-report. > > After the period of public comments and the rejection of the IRT by the wider > community, the ICANN staff proceeded to a re-drafting of some of the IRT > recommendations the Clearinghouse and the URS. Both documents can be found > at: > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-proposed-procedure-tm-clearingh > ouse-04oct09-en.pdf > and > > http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-proposed-procedure-urs-04oct09- > en.pdf. > > Following initial reactions on the staff recommendations, the ICANN staff > requested the GNSO to review the Staff proposal and ideally reach a consensus > on whether to: a) accept these as suggested by staff or b) recommend new ones. > One key issue: should consensus fail, the ICANN staff have the discretion to > decide on how to proceed taking into consideration the non-consesus > recommendations of the GNSO-constructed team. The letter requesting the GNSO > to deliberate on these issues can be found at: > http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/beckstrom-to-gnso-council-12oct09-en.pdf. > > The GNSO was given a tight deadline, until December 14, 2009. During the > ICANN Seoul meeting, the GNSO authorized the creation of the STI a Special > Trademark Interest team consisting of representatives of the GNSO > constituencies. The NCUC/NCSG is represented by: Kathy Kleiman, Wendy Selzer, > Robin Gross and Konstantinos Komaitis. > > Today the STI has met 9 times, once in Seoul and twice each week since then > via telephone conferences. As of today we have consensus on most of the > issues, but there are still major issues that we are debating on. We are > working based on two strawmanı positions, one for the Clearinghouse and one > for the URS; each point is (or has been) discussed extensively and we continue > to refine the strawmansı until we have reached consensus or some middle > ground. > > Generally, there has been a lot of progress. The proposals are more balanced > and there is more safeguards for due process. We all have taken all of our > discussions on board (both in Seoul and in the mailing list) to address the > concerns of individual registrants, NGOs and entrepreneurs. We have sought to > learn from the mistakes of the UDRP and create a process with more checks and > balances. > > The STI is asked to deliver to the GNSO its final report on December 7, 2009 > although it looks like this might be postponed for a couple of days with the > agreement of the GNSO. There is a general agreement that if by that time the > STI has not managed to reach consensus, but it can, provided there is more > time, the report will be submitted but the STI might meet for a face-to-face > meeting to finalize it (some time early January). > > We are really working on a tight deadline, so I think that during the work of > the STI you have the opportunity to review the points of consensus. > > > Thank you. > > Konstantinos > PS: some points might be difficult to decipher (following the ICANN-abbreviated world) but the links provided might help. -- Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis, Lecturer in Law, GigaNet Membership Chair, University of Strathclyde, The Lord Hope Building, 141 St. James Road, Glasgow, G4 0LT, UK tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306 email: [log in to unmask]