/
2019-01-02 Sub Team for Sunrise Data Review

2019-01-02 Sub Team for Sunrise Data Review

Owned by Julie Bisland
Last updated: Mar 02, 2025 by Aleksey KhapchenkoVersion comment

The Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Sub Team for Sunrise Data Review call is scheduled on Wednesday, 02 January 2019 at 18:00 UTC for 60 minutes. 

10:00 PST, 13:00 EST, 19:00 Paris CET, 23:00 Karachi PKT, (Thursday) 03:00 Tokyo JST, (Thursday) 05:00 Melbourne AEDT

For other times: https://tinyurl.com/ybeeyx4f

PROPOSED AGENDA

 ACTION ITEM: : By 1300 UTC, Wednesday, 02 January 2018, analyze whether / how the data in "Actual & Potential Registrants", “Registry & Registrars”, and “Trademark Owners” tabs answer the agreed question 5, sub question 5(a), and all the sub questions of 5(a), in the spreadsheet at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aBw-dW2gBzvBfhUgl3u6ShWlPZt0yyNF-Vs1qmUuIjg/edit#gid=381275905 and add your comments/suggestions in the summary table (to be provided, see action item 2) [BY 02 Jan]  See:

Question 5  (Final Charter Questions for Sunrise & Trademark Claims RPMs for Which Data is Being Sought)

(a) Does the current 30-day minimum for a Sunrise Period serve its intended purpose, particularly in view of the fact that many registry operators actually ran a 60-day Sunrise Period?

• Are there any unintended results?

• Does the ability of Registry Operators to expand their Sunrise Periods create uniformity concerns that should be addressed by this WG?

• Are there any benefits observed when the Sunrise Period is extended beyond 30 days?

• Are there any disadvantages? 

Draft Agenda: 

1. Review agenda/Statements of Interest

 

2. Brief discussion of comments (if any) on the input for the Sunrise Questions already discussed relating to the survey data: Questions 3, 4, 5(b), and 6.

  

3. Begin analysis of previously collected data with respect to the Claims Charter Questions:

 

    1. Preamble Sunrise Charter Question: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ph-QXnQLWPVXCDVtM8l51r8Nt0Xojil-CR0fU6cupiU/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]
    2. Sunrise Charter Question 1:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zi5rDXEkLGMuuRdSgXncOoPVO3vR783yQQ1JYMHqQz0/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]  
    3. Sunrise Charter Question 2: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k8SXcZRSzluqAVkTxYJL63qbBt_A8e9vZNdoKJp8tFc/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]
    1. Sunrise Charter Question 3: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10npR7b_6WWJZ6J20583GNq2OLM4jBp-sS-Yeq564GwM/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]
    2. Sunrise Charter Question 4: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ecm9e0jiA6dPsUcACNlHOLgFD5tZPgU3PzF3WtDOdqY/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]

4. AOB

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

Sunrise Charter Q5a Review of Analysis Group Survey Results - Google Docs (2 January 2019)

RECORDINGS

Mp3

AC Recording

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar

PARTICIPATION

Attendance and AC Chat

Apologies: Maxim Alzoba

Notes/ Action Items

 Actions:

 

Sub Team Homework (see separate Homework email for instructions):

By Wednesday 9 January 2019 at 13:00 UTC, the Sunrise Sub Team is tasked to provide input in the worksheet set up for:


Notes:

1. Review agenda/Statements of Interest: No updates.


2. Select Sub Team Leader:


-- Greg Shatan has volunteered.

-- David McAuley would be willing to talk to Greg if he needs help.

-- Sub Team doesn't necessarily need a Co-Chair.

-- Greg Shatan is confirmed.


3. Continue survey analysis:


See the Google worksheets at: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/2xuoBg


On the Comments from Kristine Dorrain:

-- Intended consequence or unintended;   the two different types of sunrise periods was a compromise.  This is a consequence -- the idea that people were confused and didn't understand the difference.  Worth noting in the unintended consequence category.


Greg Shatan's input on George Kirikos' comments:

-- Disagree with the statement "serious statistical problems".

-- Disagree with the statement on "likely skewed the results".

-- If we are talking about negative impact, we shouldn't go too far afield but note what we can't determine from the data.


On the Comments from Griffin:

-- Value to have a single online source to see domain name, start data, end date.


Process Points:

-- How to go from individual opinions to greater agreement?

-- Can raise issues for public comment.

-- No method for consensus in Initial Report, but in Final Report.

-- Can indicate where there is Sub Team agreement on recommendations.