[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] PLEASE COMPLETE SURVEY to detect consensus on Options A, B or C

[Paul Tattersfield]

Having spent so much time and effort getting this far it is very
disappointing to see these ill prepared options being presented for
consideration.

I agree with George, I can not give weight to a position advocating
implementing Option C as it currently stands. – Quite simply it needs work
if it is to be equitable and tenable.

Best regards,


Paul.







On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:40 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:

> Personally, after some thought, I think it would have been best for
> all responses to have been to the mailing list, so that all PDP
> members had equal and transparent access to the survey results (given
> ICANN is supposed to operate as transparently as possible). Is there a
> public link to the survey responses?
>
> I already closed the survey, but here's my response, paraphrased from
> my best memory (others might want to post their views, too), is (no
> surprises here):
>
> 1.  "Support" --- first best option; ensures due process and supremacy
> of the legal system; initiation of a UDRP doesn't affect legal rights,
> regardless of who is the initiator (IGO or non-IGO complainant)
>
> 2. "Support" --- second best option, compared with "Option A". Takes
> into account that IGOs pushed for this review due to fears of
> cybersquatting in new gTLDs (although Option C would apply to newly
> created domains regardless of gTLD).
>
> 3. "Do Not Support" -- if the old Option #6 was *fully* incorporated
> into Option C (namely, registrars being instructed that they must
> freeze the domain name if a judicial review is sought "in rem" by the
> registrant, instead of just "in personam" as it is now the case), I
> might update to "I can live with this option", but "Option C" is still
> not fully fleshed out so I must vote "Do Not Support"
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> http://www.leap.com/
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> wrote:
> > Dear Working Group members,
> >
> >
> >
> > At the direction of the co-chairs and with their approval, staff has
> > prepared the following survey that we are asking all members to fill out
> by
> > 1800 UTC on Monday 23 October. The purpose of the survey is to enable
> Phil
> > and Petter to determine the level of preliminary consensus amongst all
> > members for each of the three options under discussion, relating to the
> > situation where a respondent has filed court proceedings against an IGO
> and
> > the IGO has successfully claimed immunity in that court. As our open
> > community session at ICANN60 will be devoted to a presentation and
> > discussion of all our proposed final recommendations, it is important for
> > Phil and Petter to know which option is the most preferred at this stage.
> >
> >
> >
> > Link to survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/VCP8VKD
> >
> >
> >
> > Link to background materials: https://community.icann.org/x/64ZEB (you
> will
> > find the slides used by Petter and Phil to present all the proposed final
> > recommendations and options during the webinar last week, as well as the
> > most current version of the Options A, B and C document, under Background
> > Documents. Please be sure to review these to familiarize yourself with
> the
> > full details of the three options).
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that this survey is not intended to be a formal vote, nor
> does
> > it replace the mandatory consensus call that will take place on all the
> > final recommendations prior to our submission of the Final Report to the
> > GNSO Council. The co-chairs currently expect the Working Group to
> finalize
> > all recommendations following community feedback at ICANN60.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please raise any questions or concerns you may have to this mailing list
> > before the survey closes on Monday 23 October.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks and cheers
> >
> > Mary
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
> > Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20171016/11ea1bc5/attachment-0001.html>