[council] Draft motion on RPM Working Group data request for submission to GNSO Council

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On Sep 20, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
> 
> Rubens, with respect, and speaking only for myself as I have not had any opportunity to discuss this proposal with my co-chairs, support staff, or WG members, I have the following serious concerns about this proposed language:

Hi Phil

While most other topics were discussed during our call today, there is one topic left about deviation from policy:

> 4.       There are no “RPMs that deviate the most from approved policy”; all the RPMs we are reviewing are existing new gTLD policy; and


Not all implementations of the new gTLD program are fully adherent to policy; actually, a good number of them are not. In RPMs specifically, the approved policy included a Clearing-house, Pre-Launch Trademark Claims, Sunrise registrations and a GPML (Globally Protected Marks Lists). The actual implementation kept the clearinghouse concept, changed claims to be a period after launch instead of pre-launch, kept sunrise registration, didn't implement a GPML; if the 2012-round staff implementation is to become policy, then policy needs to be updated to reflect that. The status quo is not approved GNSO policy.


Rubens




Rubens


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20170920/066f899b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20170920/066f899b/signature.asc>