[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Co-Chairs' proposal for Working Group consideration - UPDATED
Steve Chan
steve.chan at icann.org
Wed Oct 4 23:03:13 UTC 2017
Dear WG Members,
Please find the updated document, taking into account the recent email exchange between George and Phil.
Note, the proposed agenda for the upcoming call is as follows:
1. Roll call/updates to SOI
2. Update on outreach to WG members
3. Discussion of amended co-chairs proposal for WG consideration (attached) - continued
4. AOB
Best,
Steve
On 10/4/17, 6:40 AM, "gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Phil Corwin" <gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org on behalf of psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
George:
You are correct, and I hereby offer a Mea Culpa for that incorrect sentence, which I authored. It was a mistake on my part rather than any attempt to mislead the WG.
My personal view remains that Option A would be DOA upon arrival at the GNSO Council, and that Option B would suffer the same fate because it adopts Option A for all grandfathered domains. The bigger problem is that such rejection might bring down the entire Final Report.
Best, 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
-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2017 6:39 AM
To: gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Co-Chairs' proposal for Working Group consideration - UPDATED
In my email last week:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-September/000849.html
I pointed out various flaws in the "Preliminary Notes" section:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2017-September/000849.html
e.g. in relation to Option B, it was asserted:
"They also observe that it would leave registrants of grandfathered domains without any arbitral appeal option in the event that an IGO successfully invoked judicial process immunity."
which is obviously incorrect, because in that scenario "Option A"
would apply, and there would not be any need for the registrants to seek arbitration, given the UDRP decision would be vitiated.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.leap.com_&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=UAy6fqdE7uFkRCc7uzN4yui8bwTtqofadZHiQEIO1vw&m=-02LzjBvVtihnMexEJLXsUUKNDP-i-UQlehl8OX8Tng&s=ITbCVx9iY1JRv0SpII-i5znd_-_4Y-MOEescMvJ--xw&e=
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org> wrote:
> Dear WG Members,
>
>
>
> Taking into account the WG members’ conversations on the 28 September
> WG meeting, staff has updated the “Options Proposal for WG Discussion”
> document for continued discussion on the upcoming 5 October meeting.
> It is anticipated that the conversation will return to Option B and
> then continue to then discuss Option C.
>
>
>
> Please do let us know if anything might require adjustment prior to
> the WG’s next meeting.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Steven Chan
>
> Policy Director, GNSO Support
>
>
>
> ICANN
>
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>
> Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>
> steve.chan at icann.org
>
> mobile: +1.310.339.4410
>
> office tel: +1.310.301.5800
>
> office fax: +1.310.823.8649
>
>
>
> Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and
> visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.
>
>
>
> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=UAy6fqdE7uFkRCc7uzN4yui8bwTtqofadZHiQEIO1vw&m=-02LzjBvVtihnMexEJLXsUUKNDP-i-UQlehl8OX8Tng&s=xB_pr_UidRBoQGt92ZWphKd2bT3_Le6dl3U3NTa5htM&e=
>
> Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_icanngnso_&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=UAy6fqdE7uFkRCc7uzN4yui8bwTtqofadZHiQEIO1vw&m=-02LzjBvVtihnMexEJLXsUUKNDP-i-UQlehl8OX8Tng&s=v2HDNisrQdaNCOt3sPIAIGyVLj1N4HKQJzFs2qFq9jA&e=
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_&d=DwIGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=UAy6fqdE7uFkRCc7uzN4yui8bwTtqofadZHiQEIO1vw&m=-02LzjBvVtihnMexEJLXsUUKNDP-i-UQlehl8OX8Tng&s=dVhzElBu8jJJuvW4BaEo3SV9IRYyqgpswYMAQE7nebc&e=
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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: Options Proposal for WG Discussion - 5 Oct 2017_V0.03.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 162696 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20171004/4423e447/OptionsProposalforWGDiscussion-5Oct2017_V0.03-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2018 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20171004/4423e447/smime-0001.p7s>
More information about the Gnso-igo-ingo-crp
mailing list