[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Rescheduling WG call this week (message from Petter and Phil)

Fri Jul 24 01:22:27 UTC 2015

Hello again everyone,

As the ³small group² isn¹t a GNSO Working Group or Cross-Community Working
Group, the meeting was not recorded or transcribed in the same way as we
would do for GNSO WG/CWGs. I expect that the status of the proposal will
be one of the major items to be discussed on the call between Phil,
Petter, Mason, Chris Disspain and Thomas Schneider. Staff is trying to
confirm some possible dates for the call, and I hope we will be able to
find mutually agreeable times in short order. We will of course be happy
to work with Phil, Petter and Mason to put together a report for this WG
following the call.

It may be worth noting that the IGOs, NGPC and GAC do not intend the
updated proposal to be a directive to the GNSO, as they have each
expressly acknowledged the role of the GNSO in developing gTLD policy.
This was in fact a topic of discussion among the GNSO Council, the GAC and
the Board some time ago. Additionally, the NGPC¹s original proposal - and
the NGPC-GAC dialogue - pre-dated the formation of our WG and deals with
broader issues than the scope of our Charter (i.e. issues concerning
Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and claims notice protections for IGO
acronyms). There are also other differences between the focus of the
NGPC-GAC discussions being conducted through the ³small group² and the two
GNSO PDPs (including this one), primarily, the focus of the former on the
New gTLD Program whereas the scope of the GNSO work covers both legacy and
new gTLDs. This point was specifically noted during the GNSO Council¹s
discussion with Chris Disspain over extending TMCH and claims notice
protection for IGO acronyms last September.

As such, the proposal referred to by the OECD in its recent letter is
expected to cover both the ³preventative² and ³curative² aspects of IGO
acronym protection, per the original NGPC proposal and the subsequent
discussions and letters between the NGPC and the GNSO Council. In line
with the express statement in the letter that the proposal will be
forwarded ³for the GNSO¹s consideration, this basically would result in
the GNSO Council being requested once again to take up the question of
possible amendments to its previously adopted recommendations concerning
the ³preventative² protections (per the NGPC¹s June 2014 request) and this
WG asked to consider the ³curative² aspects of the proposal as part of its
work in developing its consensus recommendations.

I apologize if some of these points have been made previously, but I
thought it helpful to refer to them again here, especially for those WG
members who may not have followed the history of the topic of IGO
protections closely. As mentioned in another email, staff is also
continuing to contact those experts whose names have been put forward, to
find out their availability, interest and rates. Our thanks go to those WG
members, especially Jim Bikoff, who have been very helpful in this regards.

Cheers
Mary

Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
Email: mary.wong at icann.org

-----Original Message-----
From: <gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of George Kirikos
<icann at leap.com>
Date: Thursday, July 23, 2015 at 18:58
To: Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>
Cc: "gnso-igo-ingo-." <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Rescheduling WG call this week (message
from Petter and Phil)

>They should make a transcript, too, just like our normal conference
>calls. It's much easier/faster to review and reference a written
>transcript.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>George Kirikos
>416-588-0269
>http://www.leap.com/
>
>
>On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
>> Mary/Steve:
>>
>>
>>
>> Aside from the time/date, can you inquire whether that is possible?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Philip
>>
>>
>>
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>>
>> Virtualaw LLC
>>
>> 1155 F Street, NW
>>
>> Suite 1050
>>
>> Washington, DC 20004
>>
>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>>
>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>>
>> 202-255-6172/cell
>>
>>
>>
>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>
>>
>>
>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>>
>>
>>
>> From: gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org
>> [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul
>>Tattersfield
>> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 6:48 PM
>> Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-.
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Rescheduling WG call this week (message
>> from Petter and Phil)
>>
>>
>>
>> Can ICANN provide our WG with an mp3 of the meeting?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Phil, I was a week behind on email due to vacation.
>>
>> OK would expand your sentiment such that any agreement on any issue
>>relating
>> to any of the GNSO Supermajority advice re any and all IGO issues is
>>suspect
>> on process grounds, due to exclusion of GNSO from this 'small group'.
>>
>> The Board should learn that its out of process policy development
>> machinations are not acceptable.
>>
>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>> RODENBAUGH LAW
>> tel/fax +1.415.738.8087
>> http://rodenbaugh.com
>>
>> On Jul 23, 2015 3:30 PM, "Phil Corwin" <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mike:
>>
>>
>>
>> As I previously replied to Paul, I don¹t know if Petter and I can have
>>other
>> WG members on this call , seeing as it is envisioned for a small group
>>and
>> that will encourage a full and frank discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> But I do think we should work with staff to provide a full report, as
>>well
>> as an analysis for how the discussion may impact the task of this WG, as
>> soon after the call as practicable -- and schedule our next WG meeting
>> shortly thereafter.
>>
>>
>>
>> Beyond that, I want all WG members to know that on this morning¹s
>>monthly
>> GNSO Council call I raised the issue of the OECD letter during the
>> concluding portion of the meeting and put Council on notice that this
>>WG was
>> stuck in place due to lack of access to expert legal advice -- and that
>>any
>> ³comprehensive solution² on IGO protections proposed to be put together
>>by
>> the Board, GAC and IC ANN staff that addressed the CRP/second level
>> issueraised serious process/policy development issues.
>>
>>
>>
>> Let¹s see what happens on the call and what staff can advise us in the
>>next
>> week or two on prospects for securing that expert input. If
>>circumstances
>> dictate we may just have to take it upon ourselves to research the
>>sovereign
>> immunity scope question.
>>
>>
>>
>> Finally, in advance of the call  and we are awaiting word on when that
>>will
>> take place  it might be useful if WG members came together on a few
>>points
>> that they want Petter and I to emphasize when we engage in that
>>discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Philip
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>>
>> Virtualaw LLC
>>
>> 1155 F Street, NW
>>
>> Suite 1050
>>
>> Washington, DC 20004
>>
>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>>
>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>>
>> 202-255-6172/cell
>>
>>
>>
>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>
>>
>>
>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:10 PM
>> To: Paul at law.es ZIMBRA
>> Cc: Phil Corwin; Petter Rindforth (petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu);
>> gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Rescheduling WG call this week (message
>> from Petter and Phil)
>>
>>
>>
>> Me too, thanks.
>>
>>
>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>>
>> RODENBAUGH LAW
>>
>> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
>>
>> http://rodenbaugh.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Paul at law.es ZIMBRA <paul at law.es> wrote:
>>
>> Phil, I would very much like to be able to listen to this call or
>>otherwise
>> participate to the extent you feel appropriate.
>>
>> Paul Keating
>>
>>
>> On 21 Jul 2015, at 3:15 am, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org> wrote:
>>
>> [Sending the email below on behalf of Petter Rindforth and Philip
>>Corwin, WG
>> co-chairs]
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear WG members,
>>
>>
>>
>> Please be informed that after consultation with ICANN staff we have
>>decided
>> to reschedule our Working Group meeting, originally planned for this
>> Wednesday 22 July, to end-July or early August. We are informed that the
>> ³small group² meeting between representatives of the IGO coalition and
>>ICANN
>> Board members was a positive one, and that an updated proposal is
>>likely to
>> be forwarded to the GAC and the GNSO for their review and action by
>> September. This is in line with the GAC¹s Buenos Aires Communique and
>>the
>> objectives of the ³small group² process when it was formed to discuss
>>the
>> initial March 2014 proposal from the Board¹s New gTLD Program Committee
>> (NGPC). The IGO coalition and Board are discussing issues that extend
>>beyond
>> but are related to our work.
>>
>>
>>
>> With the aim to facilitate further progress of the policy development
>> process, and to take into account the context of our work, which
>>includes
>> the need to resolve the outstanding inconsistencies between the GNSO¹s
>> initial policy recommendations on so-called ³preventative² protections
>>and
>> GAC advice received on the topic, we plan to hold a call very soon,
>>along
>> with Jonathan Robinson as GNSO Chair, Thomas Rickert as chair of the
>> original GNSO PDP on IGO protections, and Mason as the GAC-GNSO liaison,
>> with Chris Disspain (Board/NGPC member) and Thomas Schneider (GAC Chair)
>> within the coming week. The aim of the call is for us to receive a
>> first-hand update on the work of the ³small group² and discuss the
>>likely
>> progress within the GNSO, GAC and Board on the overall topic of IGO
>> protections, as well as how this WG relates to the larger picture.  As
>>such,
>> we believe that it would be most effective and productive if we were to
>>have
>> our next WG meeting following this call.
>>
>>
>>
>> We will provide more details and a tentative time for the next WG call
>>as
>> soon as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Petter and Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2015.0.6037 / Virus Database: 4392/10258 - Release Date:
>>07/18/15
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2015.0.6037 / Virus Database: 4392/10258 - Release Date:
>>07/18/15
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
>> Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
>_______________________________________________
>Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
>Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5044 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20150724/0b651c48/smime-0001.p7s>