[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] IGO-INGO Curative Rights PDP WG

[George Kirikos]

This hadn't been circulated to the IGO PDP mailing list yet, but on
the RPM PDP mailing list it was noted that the Adobe Connect has been
suspended for security reasons, see:

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-March/002797.html

So anyone who was planning to talk to Susan remotely today for "office hours"

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2018-March/001095.html

should consider using telephone/audio dial-in, presumably.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/



On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 5:48 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
> For those planning to participate remotely for Wednesday's call, I've
> consolidated the relevant links/passcodes and calculated the times for
> NYC and Los Angeles.
>
> NB: San Juan doesn't observe daylight savings time.
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/time/change/puerto-rico/san-juan
>
> Given the time change this weekend in many parts of North America,
> care should be taken in computing the time in your own area.
>
> Wednesday March 14, 2018, 17:00-18:30 local time, Room 103 A (I assume
> this is us??)
>
> [listed on agenda as "IGO INGO Protections Discussion", rather than
> Curative Rights??)
>
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/ICANN61+GNSO+Remote+Participation+Details+Open+and+Public+Meetings#Headings--22295347
>
> vs.
>
> https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647752  ]
>
> NYC time: 5 pm to 6:30 pm
> Los Angeles time: 2 pm to 3:30 pm
>
> Adobe Connect: https://participate.icann.org/sju61-103a
> Audio Bridge Pass Code: IGO
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> http://www.leap.com/
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Susan Kawaguchi <susankpolicy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear IGO-INGO Curative Rights Policy Development Process Working Group
>> members,
>>
>>
>>
>> I write as the GNSO Council Liaison to this Working Group, to circulate a
>> recommendation from Dr. Heather Forrest, GNSO Chair, which I endorse and
>> support. She and I both hope that the proposed approach can be a useful path
>> forward in assisting the group to ascertain and develop consensus (if any)
>> on the six options under consideration relating to the handling of IGO
>> jurisdictional immunity issues where a registrant who has lost a UDRP or URS
>> proceeding against an IGO proceeds to file a court claim against that IGO.
>>
>>
>>
>> You will find details of the recommended approach in the attached Straw Man
>> Paper (prepared by ICANN staff at Heather’s request) and accompanying Annex.
>> I will be very grateful if everyone can take a moment to provide feedback as
>> to whether you support the suggested approach or not, since this will allow
>> us all to see if the approach may be workable.
>>
>>
>>
>> As the Working Group has a session coming up next week at ICANN61 (on
>> Wednesday 14 March from 1700-1830 Puerto Rico time), the recommended
>> approach also includes a suggestion for how to organize that session. In
>> brief, the recommendation is:
>>
>>
>>
>> ·       Instead of a regular Working Group meeting or open community
>> session, as has been the Working Group’s practice in recent ICANN meetings,
>> the ICANN61 session will be run as a form of “open office hours”, where any
>> and all Working Group members are invited to discuss their views and
>> questions on the topic of IGO jurisdictional immunity with me, including
>> (and especially) the six options.
>>
>> ·       ICANN policy staff will be on hand, to provide background
>> information and process advice, and to assist me with taking accurate notes
>> of the session.
>>
>> ·       The session will not be recorded, to encourage frank sharing of
>> views (note: this is the model that was adopted for a different group
>> relatively recently to try to break an impasse in that group).
>>
>> ·       Since not everyone will be able to attend the ICANN61 open office
>> hours and, more importantly, because some Working Group members may prefer
>> to provide their views in private, I will (with ICANN staff assistance) hold
>> additional 1:1 or small group conversations (as you may prefer) after
>> ICANN61 – this will most likely be done through Adobe Connect and/or a
>> conference phone bridge.
>>
>> ·       Following these office hour sessions, I will (with ICANN staff
>> assistance) prepare a report for the Working Group on the discussions that
>> took place. That report should form the basis for an initial designation of
>> consensus levels for each of the six options by Phil and Petter.
>>
>> ·       While a non-anonymous poll may be useful at some later stage in this
>> iterative process of finding consensus (consistent with the requirements in
>> the GNSO Working Group Guidelines), it is not necessary at this present
>> time.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you – and on behalf of Heather, thank you also for taking the time to
>> provide me with any and all feedback you may have in light of the procedural
>> path forward noted in this message.
>>
>>
>> Susan Kawaguchi
>>
>> Councilor for the Business Constituency
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp