[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Follow up actions from the call yesterday

[John Horton]

Mary,

   1. As noted, the slightly modified version you disseminated looks good.
   We don't think any further substantive edits are needed.
   2. We also support Steve's suggestion and think that this will be
   helpful information, both to ICANN staff and to the WG.
   3. We don't object to Jim Bikoff's reorganization of the questions, as
   these aren't substantive modifications but do seem to make the document a
   cleaner read.

Thanks,

John Horton
President, LegitScript



*Follow LegitScript*:
LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com>
|  Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript>  |
Twitter<https://twitter.com/legitscript>
|  YouTube <https://www.youtube.com/user/LegitScript>  |  *Blog
<http://blog.legitscript.com>*  |
Google+<https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts>


On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Winterfeldt, Brian J. <
brian.winterfeldt at kattenlaw.com> wrote:

>  Dear Mary:
>
>
>
> The template looks fine.  In response to your note below:
>
>
>
> (1)  We are generally opposed to the proposed substantive modifications to
> the original Charter questions, given that it received unanimous support
> upon friendly amendments at the Council.
>
>
>
> (2) We support Steve’s proposal.  It would be great to have that
> information consolidated and at our fingertips, either through the EWG
> survey or a direct request from staff.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
> *Brian J. Winterfeldt *Head of Internet Practice
>
> *Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP *2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 /
> Washington, DC 20007-5118
> p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244
> brian.winterfeldt at kattenlaw.com / www.kattenlaw.com
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Mary Wong
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 08, 2014 9:53 AM
> *To:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Follow up actions from the call yesterday
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> As discussed on the call yesterday, here are two action items for your
> review.
>
>
>
> (1) The first concerns finalizing the letters to be sent to the SO/AC
> Chairs, and the SG/Constituency Input Template to be sent to
> SG/Cs. Attached please find a CLEAN version of both the SO/AC invitation
> letters and the SG/C template for input that we are requesting from
> individual Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies (SG/Cs).
>
>
>
> Please note that these are the same versions as were discussed during the
> meeting earlier today, i.e. reflecting WG Chair Don Blumenthal's edits as
> of 18 December 2013. This is because the more recent suggestions made by
> Kathy, Gema and John (and for which a good discussion is ongoing onlist) go
> largely toward proposed substantive modification of the original Charter
> questions. The only change that has been made is the addition of a sentence
> to the SO/AC letter, at WG Vice Chair Steve Metalitz's suggestion, that
> reflects some of that ongoing discussion.
>
>
>
> We suggest that for those types of substantive edits, staff compile the
> suggestions into a separate document that the WG can review at a subsequent
> meeting, for two reasons. First, the GNSO PDP Manual specifies that SG/C
> input should be sought at an "early stage" in the PDP, and that SG/Cs have
> 35 days to respond to a formal solicitation for input. Assuming the letters
> and template go out at the end of this week or early next, the due date for
> feedback will be mid-February such that the WG will likely only be
> reviewing the feedback six weeks from now at the earliest. Secondly, the
> SG/C input template as drafted and with Don's edits reproduces the actual
> Charter questions – and any substantive modification of these should first
> be discussed by the WG prior to circulation, since they may constitute
> additional issues for which the WG may need to go back to the Council.
>
>
>
> (2) The second action item concerns Steve's proposal that the WG request
> that ICANN staff ask those registrars subject to the 2013 Registrar
> Accreditation Agreement (RAA) to provide links to information that is
> either published on their website, or on that of their privacy or proxy
> service, relating to the terms and conditions of those services and a
> "description of procedures" employed by the service in question for a
> number of functions, including receipt of complaints of abuse, relay and
> reveal policies, conditions for termination of service, and customer
> support. Although some of this information is also being sought by the
> EWG's proposed questionnaire, having the links provided to this WG may be
> helpful in addition to the aggregated responses that the EWG plans to
> prepare to share with the group.
>
>
>
> Please feel free to provide suggestions and revisions to the letter and
> template to the list, and to indicate whether or not you support Steve's
> suggestion (or not).
>
>
>
> Thanks and cheers
>
> Mary
>
>
>
> Mary Wong
>
> Senior Policy Director
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
>
> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
>
> Email: mary.wong at icann.org
>
>
>
> * One World. One Internet. *
>
> ===========================================================
> CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue
> Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used
> by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.
> ===========================================================
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
> This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive
> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is
> proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you
> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or
> distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction.  Please notify
> the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original
> message without making any copies.
> ===========================================================
> NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has
> elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
> ===========================================================
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140113/ff051849/attachment.html>