5 November 2014

The next meeting of the new IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Working Group is scheduled on Wednesday 05 November 2014  at 17:00 UTC

Please be aware that the clocks will have changed in some parts of the world, and in others not yet, so refer to the other times link below to ensure you join the meeting at the correct time.

09:00 PST, 12:00 EST, 17:00 London, 18:00 CET            

For other times: http://tinyurl.com/o2srbhd

Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled:   https://icann.adobeconnect.com/crp/

Agenda:

1. Roll Call/Updates to Statements of Interest (SOI) 
2. Discuss proposed letter to GNSO Council requesting GAC input
3. Discuss possible distinction between IGOs/INGOs, and between the Red Cross, IOC/other INGOs
4. Next steps

Documents for Review:

Draft Letter to Council on GAC LA Advice

MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-access-20141029-en.mp3

Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-igo-ingo-crp-access-05nov14-en.pdf

Attendees: 

George Kirikos - Individual

Jim Bikoff – IPC

Paul Tattersfield – Individual

Petter Rindforth – IPC

Val Sherman – IPC

Phil Corwin – BC

Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP

Mason Cole – RySG

Lori Schulman – NPOC

Gary Campbell – GAC

Alexander Lerman – no SOI

David Healsley - IPC

Nat Cohen – BC

Paul Raynor Keating – NCUC

Imran Ahmed Shah – NCUC

Kathy Kleiman – NCUC

Apologies:

Jay Chapman – Individual

Kristine Dorrain- Individual

ICANN staff:

Mary Wong

Amy Bivins

Steve Chan

Berry Cobb

Terri Agnew

Adobe Connect chat transcript for Wednesday, 05 November 2014:

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the  IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting on the 5th November 2014

  George Kirikos:Hi folks.

  Gary Campbell:Hi guys

  Osvaldo Novoa:Hi all

  Mason Cole:greetings

  George Kirikos:Paul Keating likely won't be able to make it (I had encouraged him to email his thoughts to the mailing list, so they could be considered during today's call)

  Mary Wong:@George, thanks for the head's up. I've prepared a document with Paul's notes that we can display on the screen when the topic comes up.

  Dietmar Lenden - Valideus Ltd:I'm sorry I'm not able to speak in the session today. Some issues in my side and not with the system at all.

  Mary Wong:@Dietmar, thanks - we'll be watching the chat so feel free to post your questions/comments, if any!

  Philip Corwin:Good day to all

  Mary Wong:The document is unsync'ed so everyone should be able to scroll through it.

  Terri Agnew:Nat Cohen has joined audio

  George Kirikos:Letter looks good to me. We need more 'colour' from them, rather than just a conclusion.

  George Kirikos:(conclusion = directive)

  Lori Schulman:Agree with George's comments.

  George Kirikos:Rationale is good language. If they come back with no rationale, then that is informative  -- little weight should be given to input that has no rationale.

  George Kirikos:But, as we studied in subgroup B, half of the IGO reserved names aren't even registered in Article 6ter's database.

  Mary Wong:Will do, thanks, Phil

  George Kirikos:(I'm not sure if the spreadsheet was posted to the Wiki yet)

  Mason Cole:Very short proposal from me:  In the second question, it would read, "What is the GAC's rationale for opposing..."

  Terri Agnew:Paul Keating has joined

  Paul Keating:Hello all.  Sorry I am late

  George Kirikos:My question on the GAC leadership vacuuum was based on the article at:

  George Kirikos:http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2014/11/03/icann_icant_iwont_lifting_the_lid_on_the_net_lord_and_master/

  Mary Wong:And from me: "is it the GAC's understanding that the protections afforded to qualifying IGOs under Article 6ter of the Paris Convention would be the criteria for establishing standing under any dispute resolution procedure that may apply to IGOs?"

  George Kirikos:"Unfortunately, the eventual winner of an election for the seat, Swiss civil servant Thomas Schneider, noted in his acceptance speech that it would take some time for him to reduce his current workload and suggested that Dryden stay on until the next ICANN meeting. Dryden was having none of it, leading to busy discussions about who would actually be in charge of representing the world's governments for the next four months."

  Terri Agnew:Imran Ahmed Shah has joined

  George Kirikos:(is everyone not talking on "mute"?)

  Terri Agnew:we are finding the line

  George Kirikos:The "active speakers" at the top of the attendees list can show 'noisy' lines)

  Paul Keating:Phil/Peder,  On the last item on the letter, I suggest you also reference the possibility of amending the Mutual Jurisdiction language to allow IGOs to limit immunity wavier issue.

  Mary Wong:@Mason, that's true

  Mary Wong:@Paul, noted - thanks and I'll try to draft something

  Paul Keating:having problems with microphone.

  George Kirikos:Perhaps he forgot to unmute?

  Paul Keating:Can you see my chat above?

  George Kirikos:We can see the chat.

  Paul Keating:yes

  George Kirikos:From Spain, you can dial in by voice at 34-91-414-25-33       or      800-300-053 (code = IGO).

  Paul Keating:@George thanks.

  Paul Keating:OK

  George Kirikos:The risk of doing that is that they come up with a solid position that won't consider our own research.

  Terri Agnew:@Paul Keating, I sent you a private chat

  George Kirikos:Turn off speakerphone or computer audio, if you're on the phone.

  Paul Tattersfield:I agree George, there are other similar issues such as changes to process etc.

  George Kirikos:Rationale should be for "causes of problems".

  George Kirikos:Not for "rationales for their solutions."

  George Kirikos:i.e. we want rationale for inputs, not rationale for "outputs", if that makes sense.

  Terri Agnew:Kathy Kleiman has joined

  Lori Schulman:Thre is an echo on the audio

  Mary Wong:@Paul, please mute your computer to avoid echo with your phone line

  Kathy:Hi All, sorry to be late.

  George Kirikos:Paul probably has speaker phone or computer speakers on.

  George Kirikos:(Paul Keating, rather, since we have multiple Pauls)

  Paul Keating:actually it was all muted.  just using the screen

  Mary Wong:@Petter, sorry, you're right - we did discuss all three issues for GAC response!

  Kathy:I don't normally quote Wikipedia, but here is a part of the INSO discussion: "Both terms, NGO and INGO, should be differentiated from intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), which describes groups such as the United Nations or the International Labour Organization. An INGO may be founded by private philanthropy, such as the Carnegie, Rockefeller, Gates and Ford Foundations, or as an adjunct to existing international organizations, such as the Catholic or Lutheran churches. A surge in the founding of development INGOs occurred during World War II, some of which would later become the large development INGOs like Oxfam, Catholic Relief Services, CARE International, and Lutheran World Relief."

  George Kirikos:Right, Kathy. As in the original email I sent to the list, it seemed like a single member of the prior working group thought that being on the UNESCO list made that subset of INGOs comparable to Article 6ter.

  George Kirikos:Which didn't make much sense, but that was the 'rationale' (or 'original sin', so to speak!).

  George Kirikos:The ECOSOC list, to be exact.

  Mary Wong:@George, @Kathy - right. The prior WG went through a lot of discussions in trying to figure out which INGOs to include.

  Paul Keating:how are the issues different?

  Kathy:@Mary, what proposal?

  Paul Keating:Phils ref to IGOs and Red Cross

  Paul Keating:They are no different from the other issues in my email. IMHO

  Kathy:@Mary, then isn't everything we are doing a waste of time - if the Board's New gTLD Committee is already proposing the answers?

  George Kirikos:That proposal wouldn't be a "Consensus Policy", though (whereas our work would).

  George Kirikos:Any policy we come up with would apply to all gTLDs (whereas the NGPC doesn't appear to have the abillity to touch .com/net/org, etc.)

  Paul Tattersfield:Dr Crocker replied to the GAC Communique on item 6  (the item after Protection of IGO Names & Acronyms)

  Paul Tattersfield:https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gac-to-board-25jun14-en.pdf

  Mary Wong:@George, yes - our work would include legacy and new gTLDs, and could result in a Consensus Policy (or an amendment thereto)

  Lori Schulman:My understanding is that

  Lori Schulman:ROC and IOC have lobbied the GAC directly.

  Paul Tattersfield:Wrong link sorry - https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/crocker-to-schneider-03nov14-en.pdf

  Lori Schulman:As an operational concern, NPOC supports RPMs for INGO's in general but whether they should be different for different orgs is  the bigger question

  Mary Wong:@Paul, sorry - I put up the wrong document :( I put up my own summary and notes on what would need to be modified based on the NGPC's proposal.

  Mary Wong:I'll find the original document and send it to the WG mailing list ASAP.

  George Kirikos:Paul Keating's point is a good one, that there be underlying principles or a framework. If it's a "shortcut" to not consider all INGOs, there should be some principle behind it (i.e. there's no special circumstances for them).

  Lori Schulman:Do we know of any similiarly situated INGO's that have expressed concern about cost?

  George Kirikos:If we look at the ECOSOC list, it seems obvious that many INGOs on that list do have registered TMs.

  George Kirikos:e.g. AARP.

  George Kirikos:http://csonet.org/content/documents/e2013inf6.pdf

  Lori Schulman:I need to leave the call but I support submitting the letter as per the earlier discussion.

  George Kirikos:Covenant House has a US TM, see http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73294464&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch

  George Kirikos:So, they *already* have access. Nothing prevents them from obtaining marks,

  Lori Schulman:The standing issue re: who uses the RPM's makes the most sense to level the playing field.

  Lori Schulman:Ciao

  Kathy:@Paul, while I agree, I think we are being asked to consider whether a "6ter" notification is equivalent to a federal trademark - or one we (WG) are willing to recognize

  Kathy:?

  Mary Wong:@Kathy, I can't speak for the GAC but I would think that's the GAC/IGO position

  George Kirikos:Red Cross and IOC already have many registrations, and they've used the UDRP.

  Mary Wong:For IGOs anyway

  George Kirikos:(not sure if they used the URS yet)

  Paul Keating:@Kathy,  That is a decision not up to us.  The panelists can make that decision.  The language exists in the Lanham Act and other national laws.  Whether that is acceptable as a tm registration is up to the panels.

  Mary Wong:@Paul, the difference may be that while it may make sense to "sub" a TM registration with international legal rights, that would apply to IGOs (and presumably also the RC and IOC) but it would bar INGOs.

  Kathy:@All, I think we are being asked whether the "6ter" is something we want to expressly embrace in the UDRP

  George Kirikos:That was Paul Keating.

  George Kirikos:Before we go, should the subgroups continue meeting before the next call?

  Mary Wong:@George, we'll follow up with email and ntoes

  Paul Keating:yes pls

  Kathy:Is Singapore definite?

  Mary Wong:Yes Kathy

  Kathy:Tx Mary ... .and All!

  George Kirikos:Bye everyone.

  Kathy:Tx Chairs!

  Paul Tattersfield:Bye everyone

  Mason Cole:thanks!!

  Paul Keating:Kathy,  I woiuld like to continue the conversation Paul@law.es.

  Gary Campbell:Bye all