[gnso-rpm-wg] Objection to PDDRP Mediation (was Re: Call for volunteers - RPMs Working Group, Mediation sub-team)

Paul McGrady policy at paulmcgrady.com
Mon Aug 22 14:48:29 UTC 2016


Hi Jeff,

 

I agree with the general sentiment that if it's not broken, we should not be
out looking for ways to fix it.  However, in the case of building in a
mediation mechanism, rather than a change to the elements of a complaint, I
think we may want to make an exception here if it "gives peace a chance" in
the long term.  

 

One of the complaints the IPC heard from the Registry House in Helsinki was
that there is a tendency to run to ICANN Staff & Board with complaints
instead of dealing with the registry in the first instance to see if it can
be resolved.  The additional of a mediation option seems, to me, to bake in
an opportunity and method for that dialogue in advance of a more formal
complaint (via PDDRP or to Staff/Board).  In other words, all the mediation
program would do is make a way forward for what we all aspire to anyway -
talking our problems out with each other.  

 

Best,

Paul

 

 

 

From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org]
On Behalf Of Jeff Neuman
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:20 PM
To: David Tait <david.tait at icann.org>
Cc: gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Objection to PDDRP Mediation (was Re: Call for
volunteers - RPMs Working Group, Mediation sub-team)

 

Just to be clear, this is about mediation as it relates to the Post
Delegation Dispute Resolution Policy, not mediation of disputes in general. 

 

I still have a standing objection about the formation of this group and
looking at mediating issues between a registry operator and a complainant as
there has been no evidence for the need of such a program since there has
been no evidence yet of any situation that could have given rise to a PDDRP
dispute. 

 

I will continue to be a broken record on this l, but absent evidence
demonstrating a need for any changes, we should not be spending any time on
making those changes. 

Jeff Neuman


On Aug 19, 2016, at 12:19 PM, David Tait <david.tait at icann.org
<mailto:david.tait at icann.org> > wrote:

Dear Working Group members

 

At its meeting on 17 August 2016 the Working Group concluded that there was
a need to convene a sub-team to review the issue of Optional mediation and
put forward an outline proposal for consideration by WG. Staff would
therefore invite those who would be interested in participating in this
sub-team to respond to this email and we will begin the process of
establishing the sub-team.

 

We would kindly request that you send us any responses by 0900 UTC 24 August
2016

 

Please note that Petter Rindforth has already kindly volunteered for this
sub-team.

 

Kind regards,

David Tait

 

David A. Tait

Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland)

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

 

Mobile: + 44-7864-793776

Email:  david.tait at icann.org <mailto:david.tait at icann.org>  

www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org> 

_______________________________________________
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20160822/ab2ec235/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the gnso-rpm-wg mailing list