<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">To follow-up to Volker's email, this is
right around the time I start getting very confused. Because as
there are policies for certain types of commercial disclosures --
in some countries at some times and on some webpages -- there are
also policies across the world that protect small businesses,
entrepreneurs, women-owned small businesses, senior-owned small
businesses, noncommercial organizations (large and small)
nongovernmental organizations (large and small), and individuals
from having to disclose their names and addresses to the wider
world. To encourage the development of organizations and
businesses, and the robust expression of ideas, countries have
policies that protect and defend these activities -- even if, as
Volker points you, you happen to sell a bumper sticker. <br>
<br>
I would also add that we found in a recent Whois study that even
banks -- legitimate banks -- register their domain names through
proxy/privacy services. My guess is that there are parts of the
world, perhaps some badly in need of commercial loans and small
business transactions, where you would not want to list a name for
and the address of a bank publicly. In light of recent
kidnappings, I think I can think of such places... unfortunately.<br>
<br>
IMHO, I hardly think this this type of content-oriented,
purpose-driven process is one that is appropriate for the narrow
scope and purpose of ICANN. As the paper points out, this is a
place for national law - and therein lies the balance of
expression, commercial, and societal goals and objectives.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Kathy<br>
<br>
:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5371E376.9080005@key-systems.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi John,<br>
<br>
the problem is that commercial use is a very wide scope. Some
courts have held that providing space for Google Ads on your
private blog can be held to be commercial use. Or if I linked to
an ebay auction I set up and mentioned that in my blog, it could
be construed to be commercially used. Does that mean I lose my
right to use a privacy service?<br>
<br>
What about little work-from-home shops selling self-made stuff
online? Do they really have to put their home address on their
domain? If I were an activist for religion (or lack thereof),
womens rights, abotrion, death penalty and sell stickers promoting
my cause in a small webshop, do I suddenly have to tell every
nutter out there where I live?<br>
<br>
While I agree that there may be abuse of the services provided by
whois privacy, I do not agree that commercial activity is where we
should draw the line. Illegal activity using such services is what
needs to be prohibited, nothing else.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Volker<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CADW+euuvOuexSeZSCsyxBRvHE-4K209zvxOuyPTrUk1BNfBTvw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763">
I think it's important to note that nobody is currently
proposing that commercial entities shouldn't be allowed to
use p/p services. (Put aside the text in Bob's email,
because I am guessing that is not what he actually meant.
Anyway, it's not what's proposed in the paper.) Rather, the
proposal is that p/p services should not be allowed for
domain names <u>used for commercial purposes</u>. The
status of the registrant as a registered business, or as an
individual, is irrelevant. For some specific discussion on
this point, I'd encourage you to review pages 8-9 of the
document that Libby disseminated. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763">To
your specific point, pre-launch trademark searching and
clearance wouldn't be "using the domain name" for
"commercial activity" as it's contemplated. To be precise,
the registrant might be engaged in commercial activity in
other ways, but <u>not involving the use of the domain name</u>.
The idea is that if a website is actually selling goods and
services, either via the domain name or some website that it
points to (e.g., all of the product are listed at <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://example.com"
target="_blank">example.com</a>, but it points to <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://paypal.com"
target="_blank">paypal.com</a> for transactions), that
would be a commercial <u>use</u> of a domain name. If
you've just registered a domain name in preparation for the
launch of a new brand or product line, but the domain name
isn't actually transacting business, I don't think it's
commercial <u>use</u>. We're talking about situations where
you select a product, put it in your cart, pull out your
credit card, and conduct a financial transaction, and I'd
argue that Internet users have the right to an accurate,
transparent Whois record at that point in time. In any case,
I think that these issues are discussed in more detail in
the document, and in particular, pages 8-9. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763">Let
me answer your earlier question about <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://medsindia.com"
target="_blank">medsindia.com</a>. But first, let me first
point out that in numerous cases where we've submitted
evidence to registrars about rogue Internet pharmacies, they
respond, "We unfortunately cannot take any action unless you
prove that the Whois record is inaccurate." (Put aside for a
moment any disagreement with this response [I do not think
it's accurate]; the point is that it's a common response by
some, although not all, registrars.)</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:#073763">So,
to your question, there are two possibilities:</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="">
<ol style="">
<li style=""><font color="#073763" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif">The domain name is accurately registered.
Great; now, perhaps, law enforcement or the courts can
take action as appropriate. </font></li>
<li style=""><font color="#073763" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif">Or, it's a falsified or inaccurate Whois.
Even if it takes a little leg work, the inaccurate
nature of the Whois information can be established,
and a WDPRS complaint can be submitted. Either the
Whois is corrected, or it isn't and the domain name is
suspended. </font></li>
</ol>
<div><font color="#073763" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif">In other words, if some registrars say, "The
only enforcement mechanism we're going to recognize
against domain names is a) a court order in our
jurisdiction, or b) a false Whois," <u>medsindia</u>.com
is an example where all options are off the table. As
explained, Canadian law enforcement has no jurisdiction
because Canada is the one country where the drugs aren't
shipped to; and a WDPRS is off the table because there's
no way to prove the Whois is falsified -- it's behind a
p/p service. </font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font color="#073763" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif">Hope that helps!</font></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><font color="#073763" face="arial,
helvetica, sans-serif">John Horton<br>
President, LegitScript</font>
<div> <img moz-do-not-send="true"
src="https://static.legitscript.com/assets/logo-smaller-cdb8a6f307ce2c6172e72257dc6dfc34.png"
height="21" width="96"><br>
<div>
<div>
<p style="margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px
0.0px;font:12.0px Helvetica"><br>
</p>
<p
style="margin:0px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><b><font
color="#444444">Follow</font><font
color="#0b5394"> </font><font
color="#000000">Legit</font><font
color="#0b5394">Script</font></b>: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com"
style="font-weight:normal" target="_blank"><font
color="#cc0000">LinkedIn</font></a> | <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript"
style="font-weight:normal" target="_blank"><font
color="#6aa84f">Facebook</font></a> | <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://twitter.com/legitscript"
style="font-weight:normal" target="_blank"><font
color="#674ea7">Twitter</font></a> | <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/user/LegitScript"
style="font-weight:normal" target="_blank"><font
color="#bf9000">YouTube</font></a> | <font
color="#ff9900"><u><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://blog.legitscript.com"
target="_blank">Blog</a></u></font> |<font
color="#ff9900"> <font
style="font-weight:normal"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts"
target="_blank">Google+</a></font></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:37 AM,
McGrady, Paul D. <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:PMcGrady@winston.com" target="_blank">PMcGrady@winston.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Hi
Kiran,<br>
<br>
I'm not sure how pre-launch trademark searching and
clearance isn't a commercial activity. Further, Bob's
email said: "This is one of the reasons for keeping
whois data public for commercial entities." There is a
big difference between excluding proxy services for
commercial entities vs excluding proxy services for
websites that resolve and contain commercial content
("This is one of the reasons for keeping whois data
public for commercial entities.").<br>
<br>
What is actually being proposed?<br>
<div class="im HOEnZb"><br>
Best,<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Kiran Malancharuvil [mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>]<br>
</div>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 8:31 AM<br>
To: McGrady, Paul D.<br>
Cc: John Horton; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Commercial Use -
White Paper<br>
<br>
Paul, we've discussed that as well. With the input
from several of our clients that engage in this as a
best practice, we understand that a pre-launch
website would be able to utilize p/p because it is
not yet engaging in commercial activity. Once the
product/service goes live and is an active offering,
it can drop the veil so-to-speak.<br>
<br>
K<br>
<br>
Kiran Malancharuvil<br>
Internet Policy Counselor<br>
MarkMonitor<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:415-419-9138"
value="+14154199138">415-419-9138</a> (m)<br>
<br>
Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.<br>
<br>
> On May 12, 2014, at 5:27 PM, "McGrady, Paul D."
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:PMcGrady@winston.com">PMcGrady@winston.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Thanks Kiran. Thanks Bob.<br>
><br>
> The other side of the balancing act on this is,
of course, the legitimate need for commercial
entities to have access to proxy services. For
example, a brand owner who is trying to roll out a
new brand and attempting to secure the corresponding
domain names in advance of their first trademark
filing in order to cut down on the amount of
cybersquatting.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
> Paul<br>
><br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Kiran Malancharuvil [mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com">Kiran.Malancharuvil@markmonitor.com</a>]<br>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 8:25 AM<br>
> To: McGrady, Paul D.<br>
> Cc: John Horton; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Commercial Use
- White Paper<br>
><br>
> Paul,<br>
><br>
> Agree with Bob. No one expects them to be
honest but with the new verification requirements,
they will lose the domain name.<br>
><br>
> K<br>
><br>
> Kiran Malancharuvil<br>
> Internet Policy Counselor<br>
> MarkMonitor<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:415-419-9138" value="+14154199138">415-419-9138</a>
(m)<br>
><br>
> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.<br>
><br>
> On May 12, 2014, at 4:58 PM, "McGrady, Paul D."
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:PMcGrady@winston.com">PMcGrady@winston.com</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:PMcGrady@winston.com">PMcGrady@winston.com</a>>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> John,<br>
><br>
> Setting aside for a moment the specific example
below, the part I don't completely understand is why
we think that a domain name owner who is using the
domain name for a blatantly illegal purpose without
regard for the law will somehow be inclined to
provide accurate information in their WHOIS records
if they are not allowed to contract for a proxy
service.<br>
><br>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
> Paul<br>
><br>
><br>
> Paul D. McGrady Jr.<br>
><br>
> Partner<br>
><br>
> Chair, Trademark, Domain Names and Brand
Enforcement Practice<br>
><br>
> Winston & Strawn LLP<br>
> 35 W. Wacker Drive<br>
> Chicago, IL 60601-9703<br>
><br>
> D: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20%28312%29%20558-5963"
value="+13125585963">+1 (312) 558-5963</a><br>
><br>
> F: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20%28312%29%20558-5700"
value="+13125585700">+1 (312) 558-5700</a><br>
><br>
> Bio<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.winston.com/en/who-we-are/attorneys/mcgrady-paul-d.html"
target="_blank">http://www.winston.com/en/who-we-are/attorneys/mcgrady-paul-d.html</a>>
| VCard<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.winston.com/vcards/996.vcf"
target="_blank">http://www.winston.com/vcards/996.vcf</a>>
| Email<mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pmcgrady@winston.com">pmcgrady@winston.com</a>>
| <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://winston.com" target="_blank">winston.com</a><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.winston.com" target="_blank">http://www.winston.com</a>><br>
><br>
> <image001.jpg><br>
><br>
><br>
> From: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>>
[mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>]
On Behalf Of John Horton<br>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 5:40 AM<br>
> To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Commercial Use
- White Paper<br>
><br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> Following up on the white paper that Libby
Baney just circulated, and as we wrap up our
discussion regarding distinguishing between
commercial and non-commercial use, I thought it
might be helpful to provide a concrete example of a
domain name that (I trust we can all agree) is being
used for commercial purposes. Perhaps we can
collectively think through whether it makes sense
for this domain name to be afforded privacy
protection. For simplicity, I am only using one
domain name as an example, but there are thousands
like this in our database alone. I hope that a
concrete example will be helpful to the discussion.<br>
><br>
> Let's take the domain name <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://medsindia.com"
target="_blank">medsindia.com</a><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://medsindia.com"
target="_blank">http://medsindia.com</a>>.
First, as you can verify with a Whois query, it is
using proxy/privacy services.<br>
><br>
> Registrant Name: General (c/o Rebel.com<<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://Rebel.com"
target="_blank">http://Rebel.com</a>> Privacy
Service) Registrant Organization: Private Domain
Services Registrant Street: 300-12 York Street
Registrant City: Ottawa Registrant State/Province:
ON Registrant Postal Code: K1N 5S6 Registrant
Country: CA Registrant Phone: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1.866-497-3235" value="+18664973235">+1.866-497-3235</a><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="tel:%2B1">tel:%2B1</a>.<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:866-497-3235"
value="+18664973235">866-497-3235</a>><br>
> Registrant Phone Ext:<br>
> Registrant Fax:<br>
> Registrant Fax Ext:<br>
> Registrant Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:IVP1JQKYRM3LQED1@rebelprivacy.com">IVP1JQKYRM3LQED1@rebelprivacy.com</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:IVP1JQKYRM3LQED1@rebelprivacy.com">IVP1JQKYRM3LQED1@rebelprivacy.com</a>><br>
><br>
> How is it being used? It's fairly
straightforward: it sells addictive (controlled
substances) and other prescription drugs without a
valid prescription. But that's not all:<br>
><br>
> * As noted, it sells prescription drugs,
including controlled substances, without requiring a
valid prescription.<br>
> * The drugs are not sold by a pharmacy
licensed or otherwise recognized in the patient's
jurisdiction, as is the standard requirement.<br>
> * The drugs are considered unapproved or
falsified, depending on the regulatory language in
the jurisdiction. Part of the reason is that they
are illegally imported into the customers'
jurisdiction and thus unregulated for safety or
authenticity.<br>
> To be clear, this domain name is not being used
for legal commercial purposes in any jurisdiction.
(Despite its claim to be using a licensed pharmacy
in India, not even in India, for reasons I can
explain separately if anyone wants to know.) I
choose this domain name because I do not think its
unlawful or dangerous use can be disputed. I would
further argue that the use of the p/p protection
allows the unlawful actor to continue operating, as
I explain below.<br>
><br>
> Being privacy protected, of course, we can't
immediately tell who is operating the website. Can
we get law enforcement or courts in the registrar's
jurisdiction to do anything -- e.g., go to the
registrar and ask or require them to reveal the
identity of the registrant? No. Try to buy a drug
such as Xanax from this website. This Internet
pharmacy will ship anywhere in the world except to
Canada -- where its registrar and servers are
located. To protect its ability to sell drugs
globally, the registrant has sacrificed sales to a
single country, and chosen a registrar and servers
there, to create a safe haven. Consequently,
Canadian law enforcement cannot point to a violation
of Canadian law: no drugs are being shipped into
Canada -- just everywhere else around the world.
(Which, we can infer, is why this registrant removed
Canada from their shipping destinations.) And, the
reverse is true -- a court order or law enforcement
request from outside of Canada can simply be ignored
by the registrar and server companies in Canada.
Those who have argued that the best way to deal with
p/p use by illegal actors is simply to get a court
order are not accounting for this quite common
scenario.<br>
><br>
> Being able to hide their identity in the Whois
record is also the perfect set up for another
reason: many registrars have said in the past that
they only way that they can (or perhaps, will) take
action on a domain name is if the Whois record is
falsified. But how would we know? It is privacy
protected. That removes the WDPRS as a mechanism for
dealing with abusive behavior.<br>
><br>
> Does this commercial registrant have a
legitimate need for p/p services? I would argue that
that is not the question to be answered. The
question is: Does a consumer, consumer protection
firm, government agency, etc. have the right to know
who is operating this website? I would submit to
this group that it is incumbent upon us to recommend
a thoughtful, balanced policy that prevents this
sort of "perfect set up" for Internet criminals to
hide their identity as this one has. Keep in mind
that, as pointed out in the circulated paper, no
such right exists in the offline world -- rather,
consumers have the right to know who they are
dealing with. Ample requirements exist for business
registrations to do business transparently. There
should be no difference in the online world.<br>
><br>
> Finally, recall that the Affirmation of
Commitments (AoC) requires "timely, unrestricted and
public access to accurate and complete WHOIS
information." The AoC goes on to state that WHOIS
policy and its implementation needs to meet "the
legitimate needs of law enforcement and promote
consumer trust." I ask the group, is ICANN
fulfilling its commitment, not only to law
enforcement but especially to promote consumer
trust, if it allows websites like this to continue
using p/p services?<br>
><br>
> Thank you for your consideration.<br>
><br>
> John Horton<br>
> President, LegitScript<br>
> [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://static.legitscript.com/assets/logo-smaller-cdb8a6f307ce2c6172e72257dc6dfc34.png"
target="_blank">https://static.legitscript.com/assets/logo-smaller-cdb8a6f307ce2c6172e72257dc6dfc34.png</a>]<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Follow LegitScript: LinkedIn<<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com"
target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com</a>>
| Facebook<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript"
target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript</a>>
| Twitter<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://twitter.com/legitscript"
target="_blank">https://twitter.com/legitscript</a>>
| YouTube<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/user/LegitScript"
target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/user/LegitScript</a>>
| Blog<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://blog.legitscript.com" target="_blank">http://blog.legitscript.com</a>>
| Google+<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts"
target="_blank">https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts</a>><br>
><br>
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Libby Baney
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:libby.baney@fwdstrategies.com">libby.baney@fwdstrategies.com</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:libby.baney@fwdstrategies.com">libby.baney@fwdstrategies.com</a>>>
wrote:<br>
> All --<br>
><br>
> I appreciate the dialogue the group has begun
regarding WHOIS transparency for entities engaged in
commercial activity. With the hope of encouraging
discussion on the merits of the issue, I am pleased
to share the attached white paper: Commercial Use of
Domain Names: An Analysis of Multiple Jurisdictions.<br>
><br>
> As you'll see, the paper addresses the
following question: Should domain name registrants
who sell products or services on their websites
should be able to conceal their identity and
location in the domain name registration? The paper
argues that they should not. Rather, the authors
find that requiring domain name registrants engaged
in commercial activity to provide transparent WHOIS
information falls squarely in line both with ICANN's
commitment to Internet users and existing global
public policy to keep businesses honest and
consumers safe. Accordingly, the paper recommends an
approach that balances personal privacy and consumer
protection rights. On the one hand, domain names
used for non-commercial purposes (e.g., personal
blogs) should, the authors believe, be permitted to
utilize privacy or proxy registration. This reflects
a fundamental right to privacy of domain name
registrants not engaged in commerce. However, the
authors do not believe the same right exists for
registrants of websites engaged in commerce - a
conclusion borne out by our research.<br>
><br>
> It goes without saying that this group is
divided on the issue of requiring WHOIS transparency
for sites engaged in commercial activity. As some in
the PPSAI WG have commented, these issues may be
complicated but they nonetheless merit our full
consideration. We hope the attached white paper
stimulates further thinking and group discussion on
the issues.<br>
><br>
> I look forward to continuing the discussion
tomorrow.<br>
><br>
> Libby<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Libby Baney, JD<br>
> President<br>
> FWD Strategies International<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.fwdstrategies.com"
target="_blank">www.fwdstrategies.com</a><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.fwdstrategies.com"
target="_blank">http://www.fwdstrategies.com</a>><br>
> P: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:202-499-2296" value="+12024992296">202-499-2296</a><tel:<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:202-499-2296"
value="+12024992296">202-499-2296</a>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> The contents of this message may be privileged
and confidential. Therefore, if this message has
been received in error, please delete it without
reading it. Your receipt of this message is not
intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please
do not disseminate this message without the
permission of the author.
******************************************************************************
Any tax advice contained in this email was not
intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or
any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg</a><br>
> The contents of this message may be privileged
and confidential. Therefore, if this message has
been received in error, please delete it without
reading it. Your receipt of this message is not
intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please
do not disseminate this message without the
permission of the author.
******************************************************************************
Any tax advice contained in this email was not
intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or
any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.<br>
The contents of this message may be privileged and
confidential. Therefore, if this message has been
received in error, please delete it without reading
it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to
waive any applicable privilege. Please do not
disseminate this message without the permission of
the author.
******************************************************************************
Any tax advice contained in this email was not
intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or
any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org">Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>