[gnso-rpm-wg] Action items and follow up from the Working Group call of 3 August

[Mary Wong]

Dear Working Group (WG) members,

Please find attached: (1) an updated set of questions intended (in Part A) for the TM-PDDRP Providers and (in Part B) for the ICANN community via all the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies as well as other ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees; and (2) the document summarizing the issues, concerns and suggestions that have been made by WG members via email and on recent WG calls.

For (1) – please review the questions to ensure that the updates are an accurate reflection of the most recent WG discussions, and send any comments to this mailing list by Tuesday 9 August (ie before our next meeting). We hope to finalize the questions then so that they can be sent out as soon as possible thereafter.

For (2) – please note that this continues to be a “work in progress” and will be updated as WG discussions progress. We have attempted to capture potential follow up items requiring discussion as well as possible next steps in the boxes that follow each of the major Parts (I, II, III). Members, please also fill out the Doodle straw poll containing questions on mediation and burden of proof if you have not done so already: http://doodle.com/poll/nc8ydu8cbbywtabm (by 23:59 on Monday 8 August if possible).

For further WG discussion:
Based on the discussions and documents to date, staff believes that the following specific suggestions may require further deliberation by the WG –


·         The issue of remedies (e.g. specificity and sufficiency)


·         The introduction of a limitation period for filing a complaint


·         Whether specific outreach to the Registries Stakeholder Group at this time will be useful, on the specific question as to whether the informal pre-complaint notification procedure has ever been invoked and, if so, whether the issue was resolved without there being a need to invoke the TM-PDDRP (Staff Note: the Registries Stakeholder Group provided input to the WG’s original outreach request, but did not specifically address the TM-PDDRP)


·         Whether to reach out to other dispute resolution providers (e.g. Nominet, JAMS) to seek feedback on the mediation option


·         Whether to develop “use cases” for the TM-PDDRP

Thanks and cheers
Mary


Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: mary.wong at icann.org
Telephone: +1-603-5744889



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20160805/1702bd28/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Draft provider & survey questions - updated 5 August.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 125038 bytes
Desc: Draft provider & survey questions - updated 5 August.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20160805/1702bd28/Draftprovidersurveyquestions-updated5August-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WG Member Issues Concerns & Suggestions for TM-PDDRP - updated 5 August 2016.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 45199 bytes
Desc: WG Member Issues Concerns & Suggestions for TM-PDDRP - updated 5 August 2016.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20160805/1702bd28/WGMemberIssuesConcernsSuggestionsforTM-PDDRP-updated5August2016-0001.docx>