[Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Documents - Agenda: RPM Sub Team for URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 07 March 2018 18:00 UTC

Wed Mar 7 17:42:29 UTC 2018

Gerald:  Thanks.  Still feel we should ask the question so that we know how practitioners view these issues, so that we can have a better sense of the URS in its totality.

Georges Nahitchevansky
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
The Grace Building | 1114 Avenue of the Americas | New York, NY  10036-7703
office 212 775 8720 | fax 212 775 8820
ghn at kilpatricktownsend.com<mailto:ghn at kilpatricktownsend.com> | My Profile<http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/en/Who_We_Are/Professionals/N/NahitchevanskyGeorges13552.aspx> | vCard<http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/_assets/vcards/professionals/NahitchevanskyGeorges.vcf>

From: gmlevine at researchtheworld.com [mailto:gmlevine at researchtheworld.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 12:35 PM
To: Nahitchevansky, Georges <ghn at kilpatricktownsend.com>; 'Julie Hedlund' <julie.hedlund at icann.org>; gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org
Subject: RE: [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Documents - Agenda: RPM Sub Team for URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 07 March 2018 18:00 UTC

Georges, By all means ask questions but adding transfer as a remedy to URS and changing conjunctive to disjunctive weakens the burden of proof and (in my view) tips the scale against registrants. It creates an imbalance in the process even with retaining the clear and convincing standard.  Gerald

From: Gnso-rpm-practitioner [mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nahitchevansky, Georges
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 12:01 PM
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org>>; gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Documents - Agenda: RPM Sub Team for URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 07 March 2018 18:00 UTC

Dear All,

I reviewed the word document provided.  In the tactics and approaches section, should we add a question as to whether or not the practitioners believe the relief provided by the URS (i.e. suspension) is adequate, and, if not, what would they like to see as the relief (e.g., transfer of domain name). Also, should we not have a question asking practitioners if they have encountered any problems with the relief awarded following a URS decision and to describe the problem.  Lastly, on the substantive issues, should we not also ask the practitioner to comment on the three part test and in particular whether the third element should be changed from bad faith registration and use to bad faith registration or use.

Georges

-bounces at icann.org<mailto:-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 9:18 AM
To: gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Documents - Agenda: RPM Sub Team for URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 07 March 2018 18:00 UTC

Dear all,

Further to today’s agenda, please see the attached documents for discussion: the questions for practitioners (in Word and PDF), and the list of practitioners spreadsheet (in PDF and Excel).  These document will be loaded in the Adobe Connect room for today’s meeting, but you may find it easier to reference the attached documents.  Note, however, that while the changes and comments in the list of practitioner questions are identified by who made them in the Word document, they are not in the PDF (a problem with PDF conversion).

Kind regards,
Julie

From: Gnso-rpm-practitioner <gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org>>
Date: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 1:32 PM
To: "gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>" <gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rpm-practitioner at icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-rpm-practitioner] Agenda: RPM Sub Team for URS Practitioners call on Wednesday, 07 March 2018 18:00 UTC

Dear all,

Here is a draft agenda for our call tomorrow.  Please note that this is our last call prior to ICANN61, where the URS Sub Teams (Practitioners, Providers, Documents) will provide updates on the status of their work on Saturday and Sunday (URS Practitioners is likely to be on Sunday).  This Sub Team can discuss tomorrow what Jason, as our Sub Team leader, should present.  Staff will plan to prepare the final list of questions and practitioners following the discussion on tomorrow’s call, as well as any other materials the Sub team would like for the update.

Draft Agenda:

  1.  Review agenda;
  2.  Discussion on the questions for practitioners – See the Google Doc at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1czGq3Y5Z1bVx1ys_MnfLkFE1S-_Dwc3kRzfrTprlNFE/edit.  NOTE: Staff will close the document for editing COB today and produce a Word and PDF version for tomorrow’s meeting;
  3.  Discussion of the list of practitioners and outreach proposals – See the Google Spreadsheet at:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n5ZxlbWnQy7V0cbihmcFxl3Is0dp7rwgpyzPF2VS7pc/edit?usp=sharing;
  4.  Plan and materials for the Update at ICANN61
  5.  Timing of further meetings.

 Here also is a reminder of the timing and location of the sessions at ICANN61.  Later today staff will send out the draft agenda for each session and this information also will be posted to the online schedule:

  *   Saturday 10 March, 15.15-16.45: Session #1 (in Room 104) – See: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647688
  *   Saturday 10 March, 17.00-18.30: Session #2 (in Room 104) – See: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647689
  *   Sunday 11 March, 17.00-1830: Session #3 (in Room 208-BC) – See: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647553
  *   Thursday 15 March, 08.30-10.15: Session #4 (in Room 103-A) – See: https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/647753

Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

________________________________

Confidentiality Notice:
This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This transmission, and any attachments, may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Please contact us immediately by return e-mail or at 404 815 6500, and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner.
________________________________

***DISCLAIMER*** Per Treasury Department Circular 230: Any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-practitioner/attachments/20180307/8eca0e5e/attachment-0001.html>