[CCWG-ACCT] Declaration issued in the Booking.com v ICANN IRP

[Dr Eberhard Lisse]

Chris,

this is an amazingly good idea :-)-O

As long as the case is closed.

el

On 2015-03-04 08:07, Chris Disspain wrote:
> Greg,
> 
> I think both you and Philip raise interesting points.  A useful
> exercise for the CCWG may be to examine the booking.com
> <http://booking.com> -v- ICANN IPR and consider what recourse
> mechanisms the CCWG believes should have been available to any of
> the relevant parties and at what times during the process.  This
> may help clarify the difference between (and community desire for)
> recourse mechanisms that test policy decisions, decisions of
> independent panels, decisions of the Board and so on.
> 
> And, as a separate question, in respect to your comments below
> about mechanisms that go directly to the merits of a decision,
> what decision would that apply to in this case?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> Chris Disspain

[...]
-- 
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421             \     /
Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/