In combination with the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS), it is the second significant attempt by ICANN to handle the "Trademark Dilemma".
[3] All new gTLD registries are required to use the Trademark Clearinghouse and URS for protection of Second-level domains.
On March 6, 2009 ICANN commissioned 18 intellectual property experts from around the world entitled the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT).
They produced a report on May 29, 2009 with numerous recommendations to protect intellectual property rights holders.
Most importantly, the report recommended an Intellectual Property Clearinghouse be created in concert with a Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS).
In November 2012 ICANN organized meetings in Los Angeles and Brussels to consider the implementation of the Trademark Clearinghouse for new top level domains.
Specifically, the Association of National Advertisers created an organization called Coalition for Responsible Internet Domain Oversight (CRIDO)[11] and began lobbying ICANN to halt the new gTLD rollout.
[12][13][14] Milton Mueller, a professor at Syracuse University and frequent critic of ICANN, argues that the creation of the Trademark Clearinghouse was entirely hijacked by the advertising and intellectual property stakeholders, primarily by groups like the Association of National Advertisers (ANA).
He argues that ICANN staff ignored its established bottom up processes when it did not suit them, and instead implemented the straw man proposal against the wishes of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), Noncommercial Stakeholders Group (NCSG), and numerous other stakeholders.
Most of this criticism has stemmed from a lack of openness concerning the proceedings at the Los Angeles and Brussels meetings.
In response to this criticism ICANN's Ombudsman opened a probe into the closed door nature of these meetings in December 2012.
In response, Fadi Chehade, CEO of ICANN, explained the purpose of the meeting in Brussels as simply an informal white board brainstorming session.
[2][22] During the claims period registrants attempting to register a second-level domain name under a TLD which utilizes the Trademark Clearinghouse will receive a warning if the name matches an entry in the Trademark Clearinghouse.
[23] If the registrant registers the name anyway, the rights owner will receive a notification from the Trademark Claims system.
[24] Domain Protected Marks List (DPML) is a service offered by specific new gTLD registry operators based on the Trademark Clearinghouse.
[25] As part of the new gTLD program ICANN developed an accompanying rights protection mechanism for trademark holders called the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS).
In contrast to the UDRP, the URS is meant as a lightweight, inexpensive, expedited arbitration process for resolving obvious trademark rights violations.
[26] Unlike the UDRP, successful URS claims only cause a domain name to be suspended and redirected, not seized.
[28] The examiner should find in favor of the complainant if; the registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a word mark, the complainant holds a valid and current national or regional registration of the mark in question, this mark is registered and validated in the Trademark Clearinghouse, the registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name, and the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
Saravanan Dhandapani, acting as the first examiner for the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) and the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre (ADNDRC), determined these two domain names infringed on the trademark of Radisson hotels.
As more points are earned successive levels are reached, which decrease the cost of the next batch of registrations.