[bc-gnso] LAST CALL FOR VOTE: Alternative positions for ACDR proposal as UDRP Provider

[Steve DelBianco]

Voting closes today 12-April-2013.

Many BC members have not yet voted.

To cast your vote, you may REPLY privately, or REPLY ALL.

From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>>
Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 12:03 AM


ICANN has called for comments regarding ACDR's proposal to serve as a UDRP provider (link<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/acdr-proposal-01mar13-en.htm>).  The comment period ends 13-Apr.  (UDRP is the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy)

Note: ACDR is the Arab Center for Domain Name Dispute Resolution, and is affiliated with BC Member Talal Abu-Ghazaleh.

Phil Corwin and Nat Cohen volunteered as rapporteurs for these comments.  We circulated Phil's initial draft on 20-Mar.  The BC held a conference call on 28-March with ACDR representatives to discuss the first draft (transcript available on request).

As a result of that discussion, the BC is now considering two alternative positions:

Version 1:  The existing BC position, with no comment on the merits of ACDR's proposal.  This would maintain the present BC position that no new providers should be approved until ICANN has standards for UDRP administration.

Version 2: Amend the present BC position and give "Qualified Endorsement" to ACDR's proposal.
This alternative repeats the BC's prior rationale for ICANN to develop standards for UDRP administration.  It then modifies the prior position to acknowledge that ICANN may approve ACDR's proposal since they have acknowledged process concerns, answered questions, and agreed to adopt any standards ICANN develops.  The endorsement is "qualified" in that the BC requests ICANN to develop standards for UDRP administration, and suggests a staff-driven process with community input.

Voting:

BC members should vote for either Version 1 or Version 2.

To vote, please reply to this email indicating your support for Version 1 or Version 2.

Voting will close on 12-April so that we can submit the comment on 13-April.

Per our charter, a simple majority prevails and the required quorum is 50 percent of paid BC members.

As always, members can REPLY ALL at any time to share their views on this issue.

Steve DelBianco
Vice chair for policy coordination
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130412/a2cb665a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v1].docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 169628 bytes
Desc: BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v1].docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130412/a2cb665a/BCCommentonACDRproposalasUDRPproviderv1.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v2].docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 172675 bytes
Desc: BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v2].docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130412/a2cb665a/BCCommentonACDRproposalasUDRPproviderv2.docx>