This document summarizes key topics from an upcoming presentation at the 2015 Fordham IP Conference on the user perspective regarding the past year at the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The presentation will discuss the new .sucks top-level domain, reviews of rights protection mechanisms like the Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure and Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, ongoing discussions regarding GAC safeguards and geographical names, and implications of the new EU General Data Protection Regulation for ICANN's data retention waivers. It also briefly profiles presenter Gareth Dickson of Cooley LLP and his expertise in domain name and internet policy issues.

1. attorney advertisement
© 2015 Cooley (UK) LLP
Dashwood, 69 Old Broad Street, London EC2M 1QS, UK
The content of this packet is an introduction to Cooley (UK)
LLP’s capabilities and is not intended, by itself, to provide legal
advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Prior results do
not guarantee future outcome.
A year at ICANN:
the users’
perspective
Fordham IP Conference, 2015

2. To define “users”, use “r”s
Registrants
Registrars
Registries
Rest of us…

3. Previous ICANN discussions at Fordham
• 2013
• New gTLD single
registrant registries
• New gTLD objection
mechanisms
• New gTLD GAC Advice
• 2014
• Transition of IANA
stewardship
• New gTLD objection
mechanisms
• 2013 RAA data retention
specification

4. This year, users need to know about
That .sucks
RPM review – URS vs. UDRP vs. alternatives
GAC Safeguards - Categories I and II still being discussed
apps vs. name collision vs. iot - Do gTLDs matter in an IOT world?
PICDRP - The importance of being earnest
Geonames and policy development – “bottom-up multi-stakeholder”, from the top down?
Data Retention Waivers - Hitting their stride, but will 2016 change everything?

5. This year, users need to know about
That .sucks
RPM review – URS vs. UDRP vs. alternatives
GAC Safeguards - Categories I and II still being discussed
apps vs. name collision vs. iot - Do gTLDs matter in an IOT world?
PICDRP - The importance of being earnest
Geonames and policy development – “bottom-up multi-stakeholder”, from the top down?
Data Retention Waivers - Hitting their stride, but will 2016 change everything?

6. • Sunrise registrations and “Sunrise premium” registrations, i.e.
strings registered or blocked in other TLDs sunrise periods: $2,499
• Standard registrations: $249
• Consumer Advocate Subsidy applies to Standard and Sunrise
Premium domains, in which case it is $9.95:
• “The Registrant may not be a corporation or in any way affiliated with the
corporation the domain is referencing”
• Domain name directs to “a free, hosted, consumer forum courtesy of
everything.sucks. For example, www.ProductA.sucks will resolve to a
website with a discussion-forum on ProductA.”
That <.sucks>

7. • IP Enforcement Directive
• Vertical Leisure Ltd v Poleplus Ltd (2014) (IPEC) (cf BT v. One In A
Million (1999), which “is undoubtedly good law”)
• Universal Music v. Key-Systems GmbH (2014) (Regional Court of
Saarbrücken; Higher Regional Court of Saarbrücken)
• AFNIC / EuroDNS v. Francelot (2011) (Court of Appeal of Versailles);
AFNIC / EuroDNS v. Air France (2012) (Court of Appeal of Paris)
Mechanisms for protecting rights review –
URS vs. UDRP vs. alternatives
URS UDRP
Length of Complaint 500 5,000
Length of Reply 2,500 5,000
Speed 5 days 14 days
Standard of proof Clear and convincing Balance of probabilities
Remedy Suspension Cancellation / transfer

8. Number of URS complaints filed
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1
0 0 0 0
9
13
20
10
23
21
19 19
24
17
40
14
24
17
1
# of URS filed
# of URS filed

9. GAC sub working group geonames proposal
• Part of broader push for
government-led regulation of
“terms with national, cultural,
geographic and religious
significance”
• Goes back to GAC Principles
of 2007, not all of which made
it into the Applicant
Guidebook, due to negotiation
and compromise on all sides

10. GAC sub working group geonames proposal
• Geonames proposal seeks
veto rights which would never
be available offline, penalising
the digital economy
• No nuance or appreciation of
context in the proposal
• No evidence that existing
RPMs are insufficient to
protect government interests
• Practically speaking, current
proposal simply too broad

11. Data Retention Waivers
2013 RAA: “Registrar shall collect
[and] maintain [PII] for the duration
of Registrar's sponsorship of the
Registration and for a period of
two additional years thereafter”
unless “reasonably likely to violate
applicable law”
ICANN Process for Handling
Registrar Data Retention Waiver
Requests: “Registrars will be
required to periodically reaffirm
that the pertinent law has not
materially changed and that the
conflict still exists.”
"Location European nation states" by Ssolbergj - File:Germany on the globe (Germany centered).svg. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via
Wikimedia Commons -
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_European_nation_states.svg#/media/File:Location_European_nation_states.svg

12. Data Retention Waivers
cf Article 3 (draft) General Data
Protection Regulation, which
would extend application of
Regulation to the processing of
personal data:
“in the context of the activities of
an establishment of a controller or
a processor in the Union, whether
the processing takes place in
the Union or not”; and
“of data subjects in the Union by a
controller or processor not
established in the Union”
"Location European nation states" by Ssolbergj - File:Germany on the globe (Germany centered).svg. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via
Wikimedia Commons -
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_European_nation_states.svg#/media/File:Location_European_nation_states.svg

13. Gareth Dickson
Gareth is a litigator in Cooley's London office. He is a UK qualified solicitor and New York admitted
attorney whose practice focuses on the resolution of technology, intellectual property and social media
disputes at the High Court, Court of Appeal, UK Intellectual Property Office, OHIM, WIPO, Nominet
and IPEC. Gareth was recently appointed by WIPO to the position of UDRP Panelist. He is also a
member of the Law Society’s IP Law Committee and acts as IP Liaison to the Civil Justice Committee.
Gareth has successfully defended multiple Legal Rights Objections and Community Objections as part
of ICANN’s new gTLD program, including three Objections filed by the Independent Objector. He
advises clients on top-level domain delegation as well as on issues of intermediary liability, jurisdiction
and the digital resale and protection of software.
SELECT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS
Speaker, "Digital Resale - What Does the Future Now Hold?," IBC's 14th International Copyright Law
Conference, London (Dec. 2014)
Author, "UK: Now is the time for review - The online domain expansion raises a number of issues for
UK rights holders," World Trademark Review (Sept. 2014)
Speaker, "Practical steps for policing the Internet and latest news on gTLDs," Sweet & Maxwell Annual
Trade Mark Conference, London (June 2014)
Author, "Trade Marks and the Internet," Westlaw UK Insight (April 2014)
Author, "Game over for Excessive TPM?: The Nintendo Ruling," The IT Law Community, (Feb. 2014)
Author, "Social media and intellectual property in Europe," E-Commerce Law & Policy (Feb. 2013)
Associate, London
Cooley (UK) LLP
Dashwood
69 Old Broad Street
London EC2M 1QS
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7556 4470
Mobile: +44 (0) 79 2048 9719
Email: gdickson@cooley.com