...
| Info |
|---|
PROPOSED AGENDA Proposed Agenda for Next Meeting Here is a proposed agenda for the meeting on Wednesday, 8 May at 18:00 UTC:
Resource Summary Table (as of 16 April 2019) contains draft answers, preliminary recommendations, and links to the relevant individual proposals in relation to the Agreed Charter Questions:https://icann-community.icannatlassian.orgnet/wiki/download/attachments/102138618111680475/%5BSunrise%20Summary%20Table%5D%20%2816%20April%202019%29.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1555515624235&api=v2
Relevant to the Agreed Sunrise Charter Questions, multiple individual proposals were submitted. Staff analysis concluded the following Individual Proposals are more relevant to the Agreed Sunrise Charter Questions being reviewed by the Sub Team in the homework assignment:
Documents Wiki Access the Documents wiki page and find the opening messages of all discussion threads, all versions of the summary table, and other working documents of the Sub Team:https://icann-community.icannatlassian.orgnet/wiki/x/_oIWBg2xuoBg BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS |
| Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar |
| Tip | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Dial out: Michael Karanicolas Apologies: Maxim Alzoba (tentative), Petter Rindforth, Zak Muscovitch, Kristine Dorrain |
| Note |
|---|
Notes/ Action Items Action Items:
Brief Notes:
2. Development of Preliminary Recommendations: a. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 8 -- There were some limited comments in the data, but don’t think they relate to the LRP. Some issues around launch programs generally. -- Limited uptake of ALP. -- People need to be clear what they are talking about. Make sure this is clear in the discussion thread. -- The responses said that some registries noted issues with the improved launch program, which is completely different. -- Staff will revise the summary table by reviewing the source material. b. Discuss agreed Sunrise Charter Question 9, in conjunction with Proposal #13 -- Support for keeping the current rules. -- Let mark holders decide where to register the mark in Sunrise. -- Anecdote suggest problems -- scenarios where people gamed the system. -- Solution penalizes the vast majority of genuine brand owners. -- Don’t develop a system that goes further than it should. -- Not every TLD is category-specific. Proposal #13, Michael Karanicolas: -- Where a top level domain is suggestive of a category of service, then the TM holder would have to prove use in that category of service. -- The proposal doesn’t go far enough. -- Could look at how SDRP could address the problem or some variant |