[ALAC] Fwd: Actually ICANN is creating new rights for THOUSANDS of derivations of a big brand TM, not 50 like staff claims in the large print. It is TM+50 derivations of each trademark label in the small print

[JJS]

*Evan,*
*as this thing is taking on indecent proportions, it's time to use words
with a stronger content. In our future comments on so-called "protection"
of trademarks, why not use "domain name hoarding", instead of just
"squatting" which has now become almost innocuous?*
*JJS.*


2013/3/27 Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> Date: 27 March 2013 01:15
> Subject: Actually ICANN is creating new rights for THOUSANDS of derivations
> of a big brand TM, not 50 like staff claims in the large print. It is TM+50
> derivations of each trademark label in the small print
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
>
>
> It was revealed today during ICANN's new gtld webinar that ICANN is in fact
> creating rights to much more than the TM+50 derivations of that mark in its
> trademark clearinghouse.  The fine print of this new right reads closer to
> "trademark + 50 derivations of that mark *for each trademark label".*
>
> So for example, for big brand companies like Apple, who will have a
> trademark registration in 30 countries for the word IPOD, ICANN will be
> assigning each of those separate registrations for the same trademark a new
> "trademark label", and *each trademark label* will be allowed to block
> registrations of the trademark +50 derivations.
>
> So in the Apple/IPOD example, Apple will be able block registrations for
> the TM + 1500 derivations of that mark (30 countries x 50 derivations =
> 1500).    And ICANN staff confirmed that this is how staff's policy is
> designed to work on the webinar today.
>
> So this very practical example shows how half-baked staff's proposal truly
> is.  Had the community ever been allowed to develop this proposal, these
> little "oopsies" could have been avoided.  Of course it isn't an "oopsy"
> for the TM lobbyists who created the proposal - its a gigantic windfall of
> rights that exist no where in law, obtained no community consensus, and
> chill the speech of thousands of other lawful uses of a word.
>
> This very important distinction between a trademark and trademark label
> shows how big brands will in fact be able to block thousands of unrelated,
> lawful expression in the DNS.  But ICANN promised that it won't be creating
> new rights with its policies, so I guess we don't have to worry and should
> trust them....
>
> Sigh,
> Robin
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto Canada
>
> Em: evan at telly dot org
> Sk: evanleibovitch
> Tw: el56
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>