[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] MP3, Attendance & AC Chat for IGO-INGO CRP PDP WG call on Thursday, 27 July 2017
Terri Agnew
terri.agnew at icann.org
Thu Jul 27 19:11:31 UTC 2017
Dear All,
Please find the attendance and MP3 recording along with the AC recording and
chat below for the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection PDP WG Meeting held
on Thursday, 27 July 2017 at 16:00 UTC.
Mp3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-crp-pdp-27jul17-en.mp3
AC Recording:
<https://participate.icann.org/p1y6ocluh8o/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=a734cab52dd0f74b
6487850c643c955ffb306ed2d345023772faa3091aafe84d>
https://participate.icann.org/p1y6ocluh8o/
The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master
Calendar page: <https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar>
https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar
Attendees:
George Kirikos
Petter Rindforth
Paul Tattersfield
Phil Corwin
Osvaldo Novoa
David Maher
Apologies:
Jay Chapman
Mason Cole
Paul Keating
ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Steve Chan
Terri Agnew
** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/>
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/
Wiki Agenda page: <https://community.icann.org/x/_gAhB>
https://community.icann.org/x/_gAhB
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Terri
-------------------------------
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Thursday, 27 July 2017
Terri Agnew:Welcome to the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection
Mechanisms Working Group call on Thursday, 27 July 2017 at 16:00 UTC for 90
minutes
Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_-
5FgAhB
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_
-5FgAhB&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFp
CIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3yS
Cc&s=IBftNSm05XpP08pHWOBoOLjHnc_FF28R354O2tgyjAc&e>
&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=IB
ftNSm05XpP08pHWOBoOLjHnc_FF28R354O2tgyjAc&e=
George Kirikos:Hi folks.
Petter Rindforth:@George: Not surprised to see that you are already "on
board"
George Kirikos:Hey Petter. I just logged in a few seconds before you did.
:-)
George Kirikos:How are things in Sweden today?
Petter Rindforth:Nice and sunny
George Kirikos:Perhaps blasting out an email reminder might be wise?
Petter Rindforth:Good idea - Mary, can you send a reminder, please
George Kirikos:It looks like it already went out.
Mary Wong:Terri is way faster than I am
George Kirikos:There must be a way to automate those, to make it even
easier. :-)
Mary Wong:@George, I just realized that I did not update the Options 3, 4
and 5 document to add the missing bit from your proposal for Option 4 that I
inadvertently omitted the first time around. My apologies! (but I think you
already noted that last week, and please feel free to do so again this week
if need be.)
George Kirikos:That's alright, Mary.
Mary Wong:Thanks George!
Philip Corwin:Hello all
Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all!
George Kirikos:I saw Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets last
night. This PDP is like "ICANN and the Working Group of a Thousand Days"
(and counting) :-)
Paul Tattersfield:Hello everyone
George Kirikos:Hey Paul.
George Kirikos:Hi Phil & Osvaldo too. (sorry, has stepped away and missed
your entrances!)
George Kirikos:*has = had
George Kirikos:Perhaps dispose of Option 5 quickly? I think the premise
was incorrect, as I pointed out at:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-July/000785.html (i.e.
there is still a certification by the respondent, albeit via the providers'
supplemental rules)
Terri Agnew:everyone can scroll themselves
George Kirikos:Page 2 of the doc on screen.
Mary Wong:Paul Keating's new proposal (Option 5) starts on Page 2
George Kirikos:"3. Alternative Proposal" = Option 5.
George Kirikos:It's obviously wrong, though, see the email I sent. There
is a waiver.
George Kirikos:Understand the fairness aspect.
George Kirikos:His proposal did have a saving grace, if the respondent
sued in court immediately without agreeing to the certification. See my
comments at:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-July/000786.html
Mary Wong:@Petter, you may need to reboot AC. The document is on the
screen in AC.
Terri Agnew:@Petter, you may need to log out and back in, or try a
different browser
Philip Corwin:I definitely see it on my screen
George Kirikos:It's definitely in the Supplemental Rules, Petter.
George Kirikos:Is that the Pirate Bay case?
Mary Wong:In the UK, for instance, you can ask the court to order specific
performance (mentioned by Paul), but that is usually only when damages are
considered inadequate as a primary remedy.
George Kirikos:That Swedish case is discussed at:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torrentfreak.com_court-
2Dorders-2Dpirate-2Dbay-2Ddomains-2Dforfeited-2Dstate-2D160512_
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torrentfreak.com_court
-2Dorders-2Dpirate-2Dbay-2Ddomains-2Dforfeited-2Dstate-2D160512_&d=DwICaQ&c=
FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0
AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=UMEvMm5KKdiK69
VDt4tH8LsdCT997HxHECCBAfGq0yU&e>
&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=UM
EvMm5KKdiK69VDt4tH8LsdCT997HxHECCBAfGq0yU&e=
George Kirikos:No, Paul K. was referencing the UDRP rules, see:
Complainant: 3(b)(xiii)
George
Kirikos:https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en
Paul Tattersfield:I don't believe in most jurisdictions that the mutual
jurisdiction clause would extend to a waiver of execution
Mary Wong:@Paul T (taking off my staff hat and putting back my (creaky and
ancient) lawyer hat), I think that's right.
George Kirikos: 5(c)(viii) is for the respondent.
George Kirikos:Yes, I'm sure the updated UDRP will change that language.
Probably just an oversight when it was implemented, to skip the correct
certification language within the rules.
George Kirikos:That's why the supplemental rules are fixing it.
George Kirikos:Actually, Paul K. *did* cite the paragraphs, see:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-July/000784.html
George Kirikos:Complainants: (xiii)
George Kirikos:Respondents: (viii)
George Kirikos:See his email. :-) HE just missed the fact that the ADR
providers stuff the language into their Supplemental Rules, to cover the
respondent.
George Kirikos:Was Option 2 amended? THe PDF was dated July 16th, though?
Philip Corwin:And my point is that if respondents are being required by
Supplemental Rules to waive future claims against the UDRP provider themn
why not the Complainant as well? Whether such mutual waiver is relevant to
our work is a separate issue.
George Kirikos:The Risk Analysis would allow a great structured approach
to analyzing the Options, so they can be ranked by each participant in the
PDP, in my opinion.
George Kirikos:It was already started for Options 1 & 2.
George Kirikos:GAC list is meaningless. It's a court that determines if we
ever get to Option 2, i.e. if they "buy" the IGO's claimed immunity.
Paul Tattersfield:Phil +1
Mary Wong:@George, yes, that is one of the permutations, if indeed
arbitration is to be recommended as a step after the court.
George Kirikos:No, not in relation to Option 2.
Paul Tattersfield:Given it's the same principle matter can an IGO even
assert immunity? If they brought an action in a court they couldn't then
cite immunity if the defendant challengeed an initial determination.
George Kirikos:@Paul T: The IGO is defending the lawsuit (domain name
owner brings the lawsuit). IGO is asserting immunity as a defense to the
lawsuit.
Mary Wong:@Paul, right - the IGO will not initiate the court action as
that essentially wipes out jurisdictional immunity.
George Kirikos:No messages to that list since June.
George Kirikos:http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/discussion-igo-rc/
George Kirikos:Here's the proposed timeline:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20170726/957d8ae
1/PDPCompletionTimeline-DRAFT-0001.pdf
George Kirikos:It contemplates finishing in December.
George Kirikos:That schedule has fewer than 10 scheduled WG meetings, so
we're in the home stretch.
Mary Wong:You can end the public comment period before 4 Nov, if
appropriate, and still do a session at ICANN60 before finalizing the report.
Paul Tattersfield:Same expert?
George Kirikos:Expert on what question, though?
Mary Wong:@Petter, yes, that was our assumption - that the WG will not
choose to consult another legal expert, this time on the arbitration
elements or some other legal topic.
George Kirikos:I think we've thoroughly researched all the topics at this
point.
Mary Wong:@George, we were thinking that the arbitration issue may merit
feedback - whether as an expert opinion or just through seeking public
comment.
Mary Wong:(as we are not experts in international arbitration)
George Kirikos:ICANN itself has arbitration elements within the new gTLD
program for registry operators.
George Kirikos:So, it's within their knowledge base, presumably.
George Kirikos:Although, they specify a provider. If Option 2 is adopted
(directly, or via a part of Option 4), it may be more broad, though, e.g.
any suitable arbitration provider, not necessarily picked/certified by
ICANN.
George Kirikos:Although, I think Option 1 is still the best pick, simply
nullify the UDRP decision in the event an IGO successfully asserts immunity.
George Kirikos:Option 1 is easier to implement, too. :-)
George Kirikos:When you have ICANN oversight, you get situations where
UDRP panelists involve themselves in reverse domain name hijackings, with
ICANN sitting on their hands.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domainnamewire.com_2016_
05_20_udrp-2Dpanelist-2Dreverse-2Ddomain-2Dname-2Dhijacking_
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__domainnamewire.com_2016
_05_20_udrp-2Dpanelist-2Dreverse-2Ddomain-2Dname-2Dhijacking_&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY
1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIg
n-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=Oad9plAZXh1vPYAE7
LqTOpuF9_5j5pPadOJgBrlswoo&e>
&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=Oa
d9plAZXh1vPYAE7LqTOpuF9_5j5pPadOJgBrlswoo&e=
George Kirikos:Online system?!?!?
George Kirikos:That was already the UDRP ---- this is supposed to mimic
the courts, e.g. discovery, cross-examination, etc.
Philip Corwin:If online means a video meeting then perhaps. If it means
just submitting papers then no.
George Kirikos:Here's a couple of Canadian arbitration providers, as
listed by one of Canada's largest law firms:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__blg.com_en_News-2DAnd-2D
Publications_Publication-5F4034
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__blg.com_en_News-2DAnd-2
DPublications_Publication-5F4034&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJ
ms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oP
jqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=ZiafRClRNh57WCKDC7mp3r9RtgZQJ4jW5JSsMrrS5SQ&e>
&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=IBivpYQhwy1Dq-oPjqG8e7P3HxCKKQsqWHty3N3ySCc&s=Zi
afRClRNh57WCKDC7mp3r9RtgZQJ4jW5JSsMrrS5SQ&e=
George Kirikos:(BLG.com is one of my law firms, for disclosure)
George Kirikos:Do we have a decision as to how long the comment period
will be, and also whether we are going to have it?
George Kirikos:i.e. the 2 chairs weighed in, but we didn't ask the group
or vote, etc.
Philip Corwin: We will make decisions on whether to have a comment period
after we decide on elements of the final report. Premature now
George Kirikos:Last week we have 11 or 12.
George Kirikos:*had
Mary Wong:Staff will send out the action items from this meeting, drawing
WG members' and Paul K's attention to furthering discussion on the Options
(and Paul K for Option 5).
George Kirikos:We can have email discussions too, when there aren't
scheduled working group meetings.
George Kirikos:So, work can still get done.
Philip Corwin:Yes, we can have email exchanges throughout August
George Kirikos:Have a nice day, folks!
Philip Corwin:Bye all
Paul Tattersfield:thanks all bye
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20170727/5d53d4b6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5018 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20170727/5d53d4b6/smime-0001.p7s>
More information about the Gnso-igo-ingo-crp
mailing list