<html>
<body>
Jeff, you are correct. But I think what we sort of agreed to was to have
a group ready if it is needed. <br><br>
At the very least, the kind of suggestions that NAF has made related to
the number of requests in a single URS seems reasonable (although I admit
that my presumption was that the limit was already 1).<br><br>
But as you, I worked hard on the STI and will do so again if more work is
needed.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 25/10/2012 04:11 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">All,<br>
<br>
I am not sure why we are giving this request any credibility. Sorry
for my bluntness, but no one answered my questions during the GNSO
session or afterwards. We seem to be conceding to ICANN that a team
is necessary to revise URS policy even before seeing any of the results
of the RFI which we now know there is at least one bidder that will
propose doing the URS in accordance with the current policies laid out in
the Guidebook for the price expected.<br>
<br>
To concede now that policy work needs to be done is conceding that the
ICANN is in fact held hostage by the current vendors providing existing
UDRP services. If we do indeed need to develop new policies around
the URS (which at this point in time, there is no evidence that this
needs to be done), I think we should address it then. But aren’t we
putting the cart before the horse?<br>
<br>
All of those caveats aside, if we are forced to set up a group, you can
count on my participation.<br><br>
Thanks!<br>
<br>
<b>Jeffrey J. Neuman <br>
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs</b><br><br>
<br>
<b>From:</b> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Thomas
Rickert<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jonathan Robinson<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'Petter Rindforth'; council@gnso.icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [council] URS follow-up<br>
<br>
I would like to join this, too!<br>
<br>
Thomas<br>
<br>
<br>
Am 22.10.2012 um 22:35 schrieb Jonathan Robinson
<<a href="mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com">
jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com</a>>:<br><br>
<br>
Many thanks Peter. <br>
<br>
Good to have you on board for this and other items.<br>
<br>
Best wishes,<br>
<br>
<br>
Jonathan<br>
<br>
<b>From:</b>
<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">
owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Petter
Rindforth<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 22 October 2012 00:38<br>
<b>To:</b>
<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>;
Jonathan Robinson<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [council] FW: URS follow-up<br>
<br>
Dear Jonathan and All new Colleagues,<br>
<br>
Just to express my interest in participate in the further work with URS
(as it seems we now have to).<br>
<br>
I have experience as an .xxx Arbitrator and also created the Swedish ADR
Accelerated Proceeding, so I hope I can therewith add some ideas -
and questions - in order to have a <i>fast as possible final
solution</i> regarding the URS.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Petter<br>
<br><br>
<pre>-- </pre><br><br>
<pre>Petter Rindforth, LL M</pre><br><br>
<pre> </pre><br><br>
<pre>Fenix Legal KB</pre><br><br>
<pre>Stureplan 4c, 4tr</pre><br><br>
<pre>114 35 Stockholm</pre><br><br>
<pre>Sweden</pre><br><br>
<pre>Fax: +46(0)8-4631010</pre><br><br>
<pre>Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360</pre><br><br>
<pre>E-mail:
<a href="mailto:petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu">
petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu</a></pre><br><br>
<pre><a href="http://www.fenixlegal.eu/" eudora="autourl">
www.fenixlegal.eu</a></pre><br><br>
<pre> </pre><br><br>
<pre> </pre><br><br>
<pre>NOTICE</pre><br><br>
<pre>This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or
individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential
attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested
not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains.
Please delete it immediately and notify us by return
e-mail.</pre><br><br>
<pre>Fenix Legal KB, Sweden,
<a href="http://www.fenixlegal.eu">www.fenixlegal.eu</a></pre><br><br>
<pre>Thank you</pre><br>
On 21 okt 2012 23:44 "Jonathan Robinson"
<a href="mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com">
<jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com></a> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>All,<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Please be aware of the following note from Olof Nordling when we next
consider the URS and associated issues.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Jonathan<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>From:</b> Olof Nordling
[<a href="mailto:olof.nordling@icann.org">
mailto:olof.nordling@icann.org</a>] <br>
<dd>Sent:</b> 21 October 2012 15:33<br>
<dd>To:</b>
<a href="mailto:jonathan.robinson@iprota.com">
jonathan.robinson@iprota.com</a><br>
<dd>Cc:</b> Kurt Pritz<br>
<dd>Subject:</b> URS follow-up<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Dear Jonathan,<br>
<dd>Congratulations to your recent election as GNSO Council Chair and
many thanks to you and to all Council members for the constructive
discussions we had on URS matters on 18 October! The willingness to
consider a drafting team to address URS implementation questions and
issues is much appreciated.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>The subsequent URS session the same day in Toronto proved most
interesting. In addition to presentations from NAF and WIPO as
potential URS providers, we had the advantage of a very late addition to
the agenda – a presentation from a “new entrant”, Intersponsive,
intending to respond to the RFI with a proposal within the target fee,
although with some adjustments of the URS provisions. Also NAF clarified
that they would be able to stay within the target fee, provided
reasonable limitations could be established to the current translation
requirements and to the number of domain names covered by a single
complaint.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>I realize that you and other Council members couldn’t attend this
session, as it partially overlapped with the GNSO Council session, but
the recording is available at
<a href="http://audio.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/urs-18oct12-en.mp3">
http://audio.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/urs-18oct12-en.mp3</a>.
Furthermore, there are a number of relevant documents posted on our
recently established URS web page at
<a href="http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs">
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs</a>, notably contributions
from NAF, WIPO and CAC, with considerations, proposals, some costing
aspects and, most importantly, questions needing to be resolved (the NAF
contribution is of particular interest in that regard).<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>I believe these recent developments further clarifies the need for a
drafting team to establish realistic implementation measures based on the
URS text. I look forward to further contacts with you and the Council on
this matter in the near future.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Very best regards<br>
<dd>Olof<br>
<dd> <br><br>
</dl> <br>
___________________________________________________________<br>
Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt<br>
Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e.
law firm)<br>
Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert<br>
HRB 9262, AG Bonn<br><br>
Büro / Office Bonn:<br>
Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany<br>
Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0<br><br>
Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.:<br>
Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany<br>
Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56<br><br>
Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66<br><br>
<a href="mailto:%A0rickert@anwaelte.de" eudora="autourl">mailto:
rickert@anwaelte.de</a><br>
skype-id: trickert<br>
web: <a href="http://www.anwaelte.de">www.anwaelte.de</a><br>
</blockquote></body>
</html>