Just noticed Michael on audio only - will ask later
You are welcome to scroll through the summary table on your own.
I’m back on the Internet :-)
Q8 is on page 34
Maxim is not on the call :(
agree about returning to the source material.
The conflation may have been partially in my reading.
@Susan, thanks for spotting this. Staff will attempt to clarify the text in the summary table.
and I'msaying our summary is imprecise
we just need to look at the underlying documents
.CO is not a new gTLD so not relevant to this particular discussion
cloud, pen, Christmas, the
To further my remarks, .rugby has sunrise coming up on July 8. Rugby is not a category of goods and services, but if Nike, Adidas, or any other mark holder who makes goods used in rugby wants to use sunsrise in that new TLD because they beieve it is relevant why should they be barred?
huge burden on new businesses, entrepreneurs, organizations and everyone using dictionary words and common terms
We need a solution to a data-driven problem.
If it will help - since the objective is to discourage/eliminate gaming, is there something the Sub Team can recommend relating to SDRPs instead?
exactly Mary, that is what has been previously suggested to fix the gaming issue
IMHO, the solution to gaming is to tighten eligibility to register a mark in the TMCH, not to restrict the ability of legitimate mark holders to use their own discretion when considering sunrise registration
@Phil: how would you tighten registration in the TMCH?
@Kathy--i don't have a proposal right now, but TMCH is our final subject after we complete the sunrise and claims sub teams work
The other problem with this proposal is that no one could use sunrise in a general purpose omnibus TLD such as link, website, etc unless they were in the domain business
@Michael--who is going to vet a mark holder's claim that it is doing business in the sector relating to the TLD?
Mini makes only cars, not bikes
My hand is up.
Greg is now in queue - sorry if i missed that
Who decides what is suggestive and by what criteria; some jurisdictions (Benelux) allow registration without use, some allow an entire class to be used as an identification of goods/serrvics and how will you prove commercially active - specimen within the past 5 years? who vets the specimen. USPTO is auditing photoshopped ball caps used as a ruse for use.
this is very useful!
@Michael & @Susan - any suggestions on how potential registrants will know what gTLD is “suggestive of a particular category of good or service” (e.g. should ICANN require a statement in the RO’s gTLD application?); also, what might constitute proof of “active business” (e.g. any relationship to the current “proof of use” requirement?)
@Mary, no I have no suggestions since I think the proposal is flawed
BIKE is also a trademark for athletic supporters....
minibike is a generic term for a group of really cute tiny bikes and motorcycles
Look it up -- great pics!
BMW does do BMW branded motorcycles, BTW.
@Micchael, so you are expecting the registry or registrar to make this determination? They have already told us that they do not want to do that. It adds complexity and cost to their business, and many of them are not set up to do this, they do not have the staff or the expertise
@ Michael -- with all respect, it doesn't matter whether you personally think a mark holder's activities are sufficiently close to prove active business in a specific category. There will need to be rules implemented by an independent third party validator, because registrars lack thee expertise and can't afford to make that judgment, and registries will likely interpret the connection very liberally to get the premium price paid.
is that me Kathy, am I low
I had trouble hearing Greg.
Sorry, Kathy, I’ll get closer to my tablet.
Thanks all, good discussion