[IOT] Discussion thread #2

[Burr, Becky]

The draft Updated Supplementary Rules just circulated contains the following:

A CLAIMANT shall file a written statement of a DISPUTE with the ICDR no more than 45 days after a CLAIMANT becomes aware or reasonably should have been aware of the action or inaction giving rise to the DISPUTE or, where a CLAIMANT demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Panel that it was not aware of the action or inaction prior to the end of that 45 day period, no more than [X] months from the date of such action or inaction.



 The CCWG’s Final Report does not contemplate a “constructive knowledge” standard, so it has been removed.  We should be concerned, however, that an “actual knowledge” standard could result in challenges coming long after a decision has been taken, and ICANN and third parties have acted in reliance on the finality of that action.  We should not encourage people to sit on their claims to the detriment of ICANN and/or other interested and affected parties. Does this standard strike the right balance?  Have we provided the right incentives?
J. Beckwith Burr
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20160822/ee4a17fb/attachment-0001.html>