10 June 2015
- Steve Chan
- Aleksey Khapchenko
The next meeting of the new IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Working Group is scheduled on Wednesday 10 June 2015 at 16:00 UTC, 09:00 PDT, 12:00 EDT, 17:00 London, 18:00 CET
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/p94qokz
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/crp/
Agenda:
- Roll call/updates to SOI
- Discuss and finalize questions for independent legal expert (see attached for draft document from the WG co-chairs)
- Planning for WG meeting in Buenos Aires/next steps
Documents for Review:
Background Questions for Legal Expert on IGO Immunity - as reviewed by WG co-chairs
Please find the MP3 recording for IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Working Group call on Wednesday,
10 June 2015 at 1600 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-access-10jun15-en.mp3
On page:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jun
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/
Attendees:
George Kirikos - Individual
Petter Rindforth – IPC
Phil Corwin – BC
Val Sherman - IPC
Jim Bikoff – IPC
Paul Tattersfield - Individual
Osvaldo Novoa - NCUC
Mason Cole – RySG
Kathy Kleiman - NCUC
Lori Schulman – IPC
Rudi Vansnick – NPOC
Poncelet Illeleji - NPOC
Apologies:
Mike Rodenbaugh
ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Steve Chan
Julia Charvolen
Nathalie Peregrine
Mailing list archives:http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/
Wiki page: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/sgLTBg
-------------------------------
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Wednesday, 10 June 2015:
Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting on the 10 June 2015
George Kirikos:Hello.
George Kirikos:I noticed Charvolen.com is unregistered. Julia should grab it.
George Kirikos:At under $15/yr, it's a no-brainer.
George Kirikos:Although, I was unsuccessful in convincing Petter to get his surname .com. :)
Julia Charvolen::)
Petter Rindforth:Well, at least it is a registered trademark :-)
Nathalie Peregrine:Rudi Vansnick has joined the call
Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has also joined
Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all
Mary Wong:Hello Osvaldo!
Mary Wong:Welcome also to Rudi
Rudi Vansnick:thanks ... hello all
Rudi Vansnick:joining here as NPOC member
Kathy:Hi All, sorry to be a little late
George Kirikos:The mailing list lags a bit, so if Jim emailed, it might take an hour to appear to members.
Rudi Vansnick:i've been reading through the document and from a point of view of iNGO's (NPOC => NGOs) i do not see any objection to the letter
Lori Schulman:I am on. Thanks.
Rudi Vansnick:would this also apply to INGO's ?
George Kirikos:No, we've stopped talking about INGOs.
Lori Schulman:passcode?
George Kirikos:"IGO" for phonecall.
Mary Wong:@Lori, IGO
Lori Schulman:got it.
George Kirikos:1-866-692-5726 for US/Canada callers.
Lori Schulman:I used CRP. Slow day.
Lori Schulman:@Rudy - immunity issues do not appy to NGO's they are governed by different legal structures
Rudi Vansnick:@Lori : thanks for clarification
Rudi Vansnick:@Lori : could it be that an IGO can overrule a decision on an INGO ?
George Kirikos:IGOs aren't forced to use the UDRP. It's a voluntary tool for them. They could still use whatever tools the law allows.
Petter Rindforth:As everybody else
George Kirikos:So, the IGOs still have the benefit of whatever the existing law is, in terms of enforcement mechanisms. If they opt not to use that extra tool (with the rights/obligations that tool entails), they're not prejudiced in any way.
Lori Schulman:@ Rudy - short answer -- no.
Rudi Vansnick:@George: in some countries laws are to weak to protect their rights ... so i would consider the UDRP being a real good solution
George Kirikos:Just like copyright holders can't use the UDRP -- they're not prejudiced by not being able to use the UDRP, for their legal scenarios.
Mary Wong:Like anyone else, an IGO that seeks redress in a national court would have to see which rights under that national law may have been allegedly infringed, e.g. they may need to have a national TM right in that country.
George Kirikos:Yes, Mary. So, the UDRP isn't meant to grant rightsholders more relief than national laws permit.
George Kirikos:So, if they couldn't find relief in the national courts, the UDRP should not be providing *more* relief.
Mary Wong:Yes, it is an optional alternative to litigation for any complainant (whether an IGO or not).
Mary Wong:i.e. a procedure that allows enforcement of an exisitng legal right, not a new or additional one.
George Kirikos:Right. UDRP is intended to be a short-cut to get the same relief they'd have received in courts.
George Kirikos:There are all kinds of injustices in the world that the courts don't handle. It's not our job to handle every injustice in the world.
Petter Rindforth:And the UDRP is also meant for "easy" disputes, where there is no need to meet the parties, to make further investigations or for the Panel to make legal conclusions from business agreements, etc
George Kirikos:I think a clean version of Paul's document will be much shorter (right now it appears long, due to the visible edits).
George Kirikos:Right, Petter.
Kathy:I like the vast majority of Paul's changes. What I don't understand is his deletion of Question 2, which I thought was valuable: 2.
To the best of your knowledge, how do IGOs handle standard contractual clauses (e.g. in software or services agreements) concerning submission to a particular jurisdiction? Is it common practice, for example, for IGOs to insist on binding arbitration instead?
George Kirikos:Kathy: it's still there, see #4.
Petter Rindforth:@Kathy: I agree with that
George Kirikos:(just moved down a bit)
George Kirikos:(we're on page 6 of the PDF)
Kathy:@George, tx!
Mary Wong:Thanks, Phil
Lori Schulman:I was thinking maybe we could say "rights in source identifiers"
Mary Wong:We can't (for purposes of this PDP) assume that all qualifying IGOs (under 6ter) would have national TMs, though.
Mary Wong:@Lori, that may be better
George Kirikos:Just like they submit to a jurisdiction when they register a domain name!
George Kirikos:(every registrar agreement)
George Kirikos:Except for maybe .int domains. :-)
Petter Rindforth:And trademarks for the UDRP does not have to be registered, that may "only" be well-known
George Kirikos:June 30
Lori Schulman:Yes, common law rights are recognized in UDRP
George Kirikos:Should ICANN issue a public RFP, so we can get applications for this?
George Kirikos:(that would also publicize things in a more formal manner)
Lori Schulman:That was my question, how do we find these people?
Mary Wong:@George, we can check but I'm not sure this is how we normally deal with this sort of treques
Lori Schulman:I have a colleague who is an expert in international law and arbitration. He is semiretired
George Kirikos:Thanks Mary and Phil.
Mary Wong:@Lori, I have been reaching out to law professors
Lori Schulman:I was going to offer to reach out
Mary Wong:@Lori, I'll touch base with you after this?
Lori Schulman:OK
Lori Schulman:I am back on the phone.
George Kirikos:+1 Jim
Petter Rindforth:Making it easy for us ;-)
Kathy:And reminder of the concern of the request for a permanent TM notification...
Kathy:by the IGOs
Mary Wong:Thanks, Jim ... :)
George Kirikos:I think we can draw adverse inferences from their lack of responses.
Lori Schulman:I agree. The silence is deafening.
George Kirikos:It's like a witness asked a "hard" question in a cross-examination, and refusing to answer.
Kathy:Tx Phil, Tx Petter, tx All!
George Kirikos:i.e. the true facts in their control, which would answer our questions, are unfavourable to their position, so they'd rather not provide those facts.
George Kirikos:Have a nice day, everyone. Bye.
Rudi Vansnick:bye have a nice day, see you in BA
Lori Schulman:Hasta La Vista!