ICANN rapid response consultation: don't be caught out

The IPKat's friend Edward Smith writes to ask him to alert his trade mark-owning readers (and their advisers) to a matter which requires their urgent attention. He writes:
"ICANN has published a couple of important consultation documents as with, as usual, slightly crazy response periods ['slightly crazy' is a delightful example of British understatement ...]:

* The report published by the Special Trademarks Issues (STI) team on the recommendations to create a trademark clearing house and uniform rapid suspension (URS) procedure to protect trade marks. The report is available here and the response deadline is 26 January.

* The new proposal to introduce a fast track 'Expressions of Interest' proposal (response deadline 27 January). The report available here and the response deadline is 27 January.

We, at the IPO, are keen to get as much interest in this generated as possible. Any response (sent to ICANN, not us) can, if people want, be copied to us at gaynor.ace@ipo.gov.uk, as we are providing input into a UK Government position".
In case you don't know, says the ever-helpful Merpel, today is 20 January or 21 January, depending on your time zone at the moment of posting. Between now and 26/27 January is a weekend which some of you were possibly hoping to enjoy ...

Slightly crazy here
Regularly crazy here
More than slightly crazy here
Barking mad here (not for cats)
ICANN rapid response consultation: don't be caught out ICANN rapid response consultation: don't be caught out Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. We've been reporting these issues closely. Interestingly, INTA wrote to all its members to encourage them to submit comments, which ended up in a minor spat. INTA was alleged to have "hijacked" the proceedings - more here: http://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/daily/detail.aspx?g=522de54c-4464-4967-928e-46ff958cc542

    Adam Smith
    World Trademark Review


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.