[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] PLEASE READ: Deadline for proposals and agenda for Working Group meeting this week

[Mike Rodenbaugh]

I am trying to get into the meeting but the host is not letting me in...

Anyway, I support this proposal from Zak as it seems like something we
could all agree on now, and allow the UDRP Review to address the
UDRP-specific issues that have been raised in this group.

Thanks,
Mike

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Zak Muscovitch <zak at muscovitch.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Further to Mary’s below email, and further to Paul Keating’s suggestion to
> the WG of yesterday, I am proposing a revision to the original proposal to
> be made, so that the below is now the proposal that I am making in
> replacement of the one which I originally proposed:
>
>
>
> “Our initial report and recommendation (that no change is required)
> remains valid and should be reflected in the published report of this WG.
> Our report should advise that even if a change were advisable or
> appropriate, such would necessarily require modifications to the UDRP and
> its accompanying rules.  As such changes are within the ambit of the RPM
> WG, we feel it inappropriate to inject our proposals in that regard.
> Accordingly, the IGO WG strongly recommends that any changes to how the
> UDRP procedure is drafted and employed for IGO's, if any, should be
> referred to the RPM WG for consideration within its broader mandate to
> review the UDRP.”
>
>
>
> Zak
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Mary Wong
> *Sent:* December-12-17 4:47 PM
> *To:* gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] PLEASE READ: Deadline for proposals and
> agenda for Working Group meeting this week
>
>
>
> SENT ON BEHALF OF PHIL AND PETTER (WORKING GROUP CO-CHAIRS)
>
>
>
> Dear Working Group members,
>
>
>
> We are moving toward concluding our deliberations on the topic of whether
> (and if so, what) recommendation to make to deal with the situation where
> the losing respondent files a claim in a national court but the IGO
> succeeds in claiming immunity from the jurisdiction of that court. With
> thanks to Zak for timely submitting proposed text on a new option for this
> topic, which we will consider on our next call this Thursday, we request
> that *if any Working Group member has any proposed text for
> consideration, please submit the actual text you are proposing for Working
> Group consideration no later than one hour before the Thursday call (i.e.
> 1600 UTC on 14 December). **This will be the deadline for submission of
> any options to be included in any further polling of the WG for support or
> opposition*.
>
>
>
> The proposed agenda for the call this Thursday is as follows:
>
>    1. Roll call/updates to Statements of Interest
>    2. Co-Chairs’ recap of discussion with Nominet legal counsel on the
>    Nominet appeal process
>    3. Review of text proposed by Zak for a new option (in the context of
>    a possible Recommendation #3)
>    4. Presentation of Co-Chairs’ proposal for concluding deliberations on
>    Recommendation #3 and conducting the Working Group Consensus Call for all
>    Recommendations and options
>    5. Scheduling the next meeting
>
>
>
> We hope that as many Working Group members as possible can attend the call
> this week, as we hope to wrap up discussions on this one remaining possible
> recommendation, and proceed with the formal Consensus Call before the end
> of this year.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Phil and Petter
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20171214/c8d36d4a/attachment.html>