[Gnso-epdp-team] RrSG edits -- Section 4.4

[James M. Bladel]

Good morning Kurt & Team –

I support this proposal, let’s give it a shot.  I was planning to present the RrSG edits during our call today, so Kurt/Staff please let me know if you still need this from me.

J.

-------------
James Bladel
GoDaddy


From: Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com>
Date: Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 05:32
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>
Cc: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, "gnso-epdp-team at icann.org" <gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] RrSG edits -- Section 4.4

Hi Everyone:

Thanks for the thoughtful work to the RrSG team.

We are 30 minutes out from the meeting. I suggest the following way to discuss our discussion of 4.4.

When you raise your hand to speak to the document, please be prepared to express your view on each point in it. I’d like to “go around the room” once to get each group's view so that we can capture the sum of the issues.

This won’t be a time for contesting someone else’s view, I think we want to gauge where we are as a group. Then, coming from the initial “go-around” we can identify each of the issues raised and discuss them.

Please take some time to arrange your comments in this fashion.

Thx & Best regards,

Kurt


On Sep 6, 2018, at 12:32 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>> wrote:

Thank you, Stephanie. Let’s discuss on the next call, but I think our key point is that risk/exposure cannot be decoupled from some degree of judgement.


-------------
James Bladel
GoDaddy
________________________________
From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 5:37:42 PM
To: gnso-epdp-team at icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] RrSG edits -- Section 4.4

I think these are good edits.  One small point in the last part dealing with non-binding arbitration....I would suggest that you should say "the registrar's interpretation of the law takes precedence", as each side will inevitably have its own interpretation of the law, but only one side is going to get the fine....
Stephanie Perrin
On 2018-09-05 19:42, James M. Bladel wrote:
ePDP Team –

In preparation for tomorrow’s call, please find attached a redline PDF of our edits to Section 4.4 of the Temp Spec, along with a slide/PDF with “clean” language for Kurt & Staff. Matt, Theo and I will walk through these edits, along with our rationale.

Look forward to our discussion tomorrow.

Thanks—

J.

-------------
James Bladel
GoDaddy




_______________________________________________

Gnso-epdp-team mailing list

Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20180906/5c71639f/attachment-0001.html>