[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] A proposed approach for reviewing public comments
Kathy Kleiman
kathy at kathykleiman.com
Wed Jul 15 14:29:19 UTC 2015
All,
I agree with the emails of Volker and James G. that we have to do a
thorough review of the comments. I also agree with the expansion of the
time frame to do it.
The last time we had such an outpouring of comments at ICANN that I can
remember was the Closed Generic proceeding and comments to the Board.
Dozens of comments flowed in from parties who do not traditionally
participate in ICANN processes. The Board took the time to read,
evaluate and respond to the comments.
Here too we must take the time to read, evaluate and respond to the
comments. As Volker points out, the issues before us are not only the
questions we issued, but the consensus we presented. Do others agree
with our consensus? Do they support our direction? Would they push it
more in one direction or another or reject it outright?
One thing I have seen in my skimming of the comments is a lot of
discussion of Due Process. There appears to be a good amount of
commentary on this issue, and one we will need to read and evaluate
closely.
Over the year of our work we have talked often about the month of
August. How it is a time that many in certain countries take long
vacations; how emails to business addresses are often unanswered until
the person returns to her/his desk. I think a rush on this in the dead
of summer is a) unnecessary b) will not result in full staffing of the
teams that we are setting up and c) will not give us the time for the
evaluation, analysis and incorporation that we need.
Analysis, evaluation, incorporation -- this is a very important task for
us now.
Best,
Kathy
On 7/15/2015 5:50 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> considering the outpouring of comments, we should not limit ourselves
> to these three topics but rather try to see how the comments affect
> the entire work so far. It does make sense to check the comments for
> these issues, but not exclusively.
>
> That said, I volunteer for the first team.
>
> I support the sugestion to "collapse" yes and no responses.
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
> Am 15.07.2015 um 00:50 schrieb Mary Wong:
>> Dear WG members,
>>
>> Following from the WG call earlier today, the co-chairs and staff
>> after some consultation would like to propose the following approach
>> for your consideration:
>>
>> _1. Use of Sub Teams for Specific Topics_:
>>
>> * Sub-teams comprising a few WG volunteers each can be formed to do
>> the initial review of public comments received on the three
>> topics suggested by Steve on the call, i.e. (1) Section 1.3.2 of
>> the Initial Report (on escalation of relay requests and the
>> handling of disclosure/publication requests from third parties
>> other than IP rights holders); (2) Section 1.3.3 (on the open
>> question regarding online financial transactions); and (3) Annex
>> E (the Illustrative Disclosure Framework).
>> * To assist the WG evaluate the usefulness of sub teams, a sub team
>> for Section 1.3.2 can be formed first and serve as a “test case”
>> for the exercise.
>> * As outlined on the call, a sub team will do a “first pass”
>> through a template, based on the Public Comment Review Tool, that
>> staff will populate with all the input received on that
>> particular issue. The sub team will report back to the full WG in
>> a timely fashion, including suggesting a WG response and/or
>> proposed action in relation to the comments received.
>> * Sub teams may elect to do their work via email and online tools
>> (e.g. Google Docs or a wiki page), with or without supplemental
>> conference calls. Any calls will be recorded and transcribed for
>> transparency purposes, and drafts and other documents prepared
>> using online tools will also be made available to the full WG.
>> (Do note, however, that depending on call scheduling and timing,
>> staff support may not be available for all requested calls if
>> several sub teams are used concurrently.)
>>
>> *PLEASE VOLUNTEER FOR SUB TEAM 1.3.2 IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
>> ASSISTING WITH THIS INITIAL REVIEW. *Staff will endeavor to provide
>> the template tool for 1.3.2 to the sub team as soon as possible,
>> hopefully by Monday.
>>
>> _2. Full WG Review of Other Comments to Continue in Parallel_:
>>
>> * Staff will “collapse” (per James’ suggestion on the call) all
>> those template responses received that were simply a Yes or No
>> answer to a question, without any further comment added – these
>> will be reflected in the Public Comment Review Tool accordingly,
>> as a single collective entry. The current Tool (covering
>> Preliminary Recommendations 1 through 9) will be updated in time
>> for the WG to begin this review on the next call.
>>
>>
>> _3. Collated Information_:
>>
>> * In addition to the updated spreadsheet just circulated by Graeme,
>> we can also send you archived mail files of the contributions
>> received to the public comment forum, should you or your group
>> wish to conduct searches through each comment yourselves.
>>
>>
>> We hope the above will be helpful in facilitating good progress on
>> the work to be done in preparation for the Final Report.
>>
>> Thanks and cheers
>> Mary
>>
>> Mary Wong
>> Senior Policy Director
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
>> Email: mary.wong at icann.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
>
> --
> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - Rechtsabteilung -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email:vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web:www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - legal department -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email:vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web:www.key-systems.net /www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com /www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150715/1b86751b/attachment.html>
More information about the Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
mailing list