Hello Oliver,<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com">ocl@gih.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">New gTLD programme outreach events</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">London meeting / 15 July 2009</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Panel:</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Fabricio Vayra - Counsel, Intellectual Property -
Time Warner</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Stacey King - Intellectual Property Lawyer -
Richemont International</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">David Taylor - Partner - Lovells</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Ellen B. Shankman - Attorney at Law, Ellen B.
Shankman & Associates</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Jonathan Cohen - Senior Partner - Shapiro
Cohen</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Jeff Neuman - Vice President - Law &
Policy, NeuStar</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Eun-Joo Min - Head of Legal Development Section -
WIPO Arbitration & Mediation Center</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Richard Tindall - Senior VP or Registry - Demand
Media</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">I had breakfast with Dr. Konstantinos
Komaitis, Lecturer in IT & Commercial law at Univ of Strathclyde,
who led the charge on behalf of NCUC in London, as well as with Richard Tindall
(see above). We discussed the points of the IRT report, point by point. Richard
is, among the panel, the only person who does not agree with all recommendations
of the IRT, although he believes we should not completely reject all
points.</font></div></div></blockquote><div><br>If Richard is the only one who differs, it is not surprising. It is a panel of Intellectual Property lawyers. Wittingly of unwittingly this Road Show is akin to a Corporate presentation that precedes a product launch which is decided. <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Starting at 9:00am, the morning was spent listening
to presentations from ICANN (Introduction to New gTLD Program) and trademark
protection presentations. Presentations are available elsewhere - just the
standard blurb which we have seen many times already. Since those ran longer
than expected, questions were only taken from the floor at 12:10. Only 2 people
managed to speak </font></div></div></blockquote><div><br>There were comments about Public participation in ICANN meetings, repeated over and over again, that adequate time is not allowed for public participation. The comments haven't been applied in designing the IRT road shows? <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div><font size="2" face="Arial">- 2 usual suspects which we all know. Whilst logged in online
in the adobe connect room, I asked Peter (Dengate Thrush - who was not present
physically) to ask his staff to be more stringent on mic time. This was done in
the afternoon.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Much discussion was undertaken over lunch, with the
general mood of the participants whom I spoke to being the the GPML would not
pass, the IP Clearinghouse would be in doubt, the URS would need changes if it
were to pass, and unknown interest for the rest of the recommendations.
</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">That said, Konstantinos told me he spoke with other
people who favoured the GPML, the IP Clearinghouse etc. </font></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Oliver, for the benefit of ordinary mortals like me, please use abbreviations sparingly. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Every participant was given a set of sheets, one of
each colour, asking a specific questions of the type: </font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">IP ClearingHouse proposal:</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">- I broadly support this proposal</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">- I broadly do not support this
proposal</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Comment:</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Forms could be given in anonymously, so I suspect
we'll only know the reality once these are processed by ICANN staff. As in any
such discussions, I suspect some participants say something in public and vite
differently anonymously.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">The afternoon started with more comment period, and
thankfully there was a lot of time allocated to comments.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Konstantinos Komaitis wanted to read a statement
from NCUC but was rudely cut short by Jeff Neuman since, according to him, it
was just the same thing was what had been said in New York. Konstantinos replied
that he was repeating it for the sake of the audience in London to hear it, and
Jeff asked him to speed this up. On the whole, and although my judgement might
be biased in a way, I think that this did not reflect well on Jeff Neuman's
standing.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Werner Staub from CORE asked for proceedings in
getting the gTLD process to be speeded up. It appears that they just see the IRT
as another stumbling block and are ready to say "yes yes yes" as long as they
can go ahead with creating new gTLDs. Several other participants defended their
small piece of pie, not really caring about the general user /
registrant.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Thankfully, we had the presence of John Levine
among us, who took the mic to very eloquently tell the panel what he did not
agree with. </font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">(I had been told privately before the meeting that
it was not quantity but quality of response/respondent that mattered - so John's
presence was a real boost - thanks John! )</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Speaking to some ICANN staff & other
particpants afterwards, I believe that the user's point of view is well
understood. It was also mentioned publicly that sadly not enough users were
represented there, and I pointed out to Fabricio Vayra (with whom I spoke to
along with Konstantinos Komaitis) that the IRT team would have avoided
embarrassment had it included representatives from At-Large & NCUC. He
still believes hard as steel that the recommendations presented by the IRT team
are benefitting the users as much as brand owners. He also agrees with the
representative from WIPO (Eun-Joo Min) that costs for the trademark-related
proposals (IP clearinghouse, GPML etc.) should be borne not only by trademark
owners but also by everyone else. We made him understand that we should agree to
disagree on this.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Personal notes</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Ultimately, all points of view are known by
everyone now. It is clear that the IRT team will stick to its guns and we'll
stick to ours. It is obvious that we live in parrallel worlds. Furthermore,
whilst the panellists were introduced as acting independently of their job
assignments, speaking to each panellists in private, it is plain obvious that
their professional function put them in a position where their employer/clients
put pressure on them. I understand that they did a lot of work but this work was
not independent.</font></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Understandably Yes. <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">That's it for the time being. I hope it gives a
fair idea of what went on. No doubt others will also write a little review of
the day as well. If I receive more info, I'll forward/cross-post it to the
relevant lists.</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Any questions: don't hesitate to ask!</font></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Is there any possibility of asking ICANN to make the remaining Road Shows more balanced? <br><br>Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">Warm regards,</font></div>
<div><font size="2" face="Arial"></font> </div><font color="#888888">
<div><font size="2" face="Arial">-- <br>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD<br><a href="http://www.gih.com/ocl.html" target="_blank">http://www.gih.com/ocl.html</a></font></div></font></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Chapter-delegates mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org">Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates" target="_blank">http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>