[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
Corwin, Philip
pcorwin at verisign.com
Tue Jan 16 23:33:44 UTC 2018
Zak:
Thanks for your input.
Speaking personally, I believe that the issue of a registrant’s access to judicial appeal is an appropriate topic for the RPM Review WG to consider addressing.
However, I continue to believe that it is not relevant to the remaining policy issue we are considering, which deals with a hypothetical in which a registrant has undertaken a judicial appeal and the IGO has subsequently and successfully asserted immunity from the authority of that court. I also believe that after three and a half years work it would be an abrogation of this WG’s responsibility to attempt to kick the IGO immunity issue to a separate WG that already has a more than full plate of Charter responsibilities. Whatever we decide, I hope we can recommend something on that central issue.
Best, Philip
Philip S. Corwin
Policy Counsel
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
703-948-4648/Direct
571-342-7489/Cell
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Zak Muscovitch
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 12:31 PM
To: Maher, David <dmaher at pir.org>; Paul Keating <Paul at law.es>; Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
Just a note to express my hope that this WG will be able to amicably resolve the procedural issues forthwith so that the WG may be wrapped up. Also, I wish to reiterate my view that the WG has identified a fundamental issue that goes to the heart of the UDRP, namely how to maintain registrant’s long-standing right of access to the court system, and accordingly there are broader implications which prevent us from addressing some IGO concerns in a vacuum. This fundamental issue is beyond the scope of this WG and is an issue for the RPM WG, and as such as previously proposed, this matter should be deferred to the RPM WG which has the mandate to handle issues which affect registrants and which may require revisions to the UDRP.
From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of David W. Maher
Sent: January-14-18 3:16 PM
To: Paul Keating; Mike Rodenbaugh
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
I did not request anonymous polling. It’s OK so far as I am concerned. I still think the group is wasting time on this issue.
David W. Maher
Public Interest Registry
Senior Vice-President – Law & Policy
+1 312 375 4849
From: Paul Keating [mailto:Paul at law.es]
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 10:25 AM
To: David W. Maher <dmaher at pir.org<mailto:dmaher at pir.org>>; Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>>
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
I agree with you. Would you be willing to drop your request that the polling be anonymous?
Or at least share with us why you think it should be?
Paul Keating
From: "David W. Maher" <dmaher at pir.org<mailto:dmaher at pir.org>>
Date: Friday, January 12, 2018 at 9:22 PM
To: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>>
Cc: Paul Keating <paul at law.es<mailto:paul at law.es>>, "gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>" <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>>
Subject: RE: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
I think the group is wasting time arguing about procedure
David W. Maher
Public Interest Registry
Senior Vice-President – Law & Policy
+1 312 375 4849
From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 2:13 PM
To: David W. Maher <dmaher at pir.org<mailto:dmaher at pir.org>>
Cc: Paul Keating <paul at law.es<mailto:paul at law.es>>; gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
Hi David,
Always good to hear from you. Can you explain why, briefly?
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:00 PM, David W. Maher <dmaher at pir.org<mailto:dmaher at pir.org>> wrote:
I support the use of an anonymous poll.
David W. Maher
Public Interest Registry
Senior Vice-President – Law & Policy
+1 312 375 4849<tel:(312)%20375-4849>
From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 1:40 PM
To: Paul Keating <paul at law.es<mailto:paul at law.es>>
Cc: gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
Agreed this is ridiculous. Does anyone except Petter and Phil support an anonymous poll of this WG? I don't recall seeing any other support for it, so I am flabbergasted by their extraordinary efforts to force one on the WG.
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087<tel:(415)%20738-8087>
http://rodenbaugh.com
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Paul Keating <paul at law.es<mailto:paul at law.es>> wrote:
My 2 cents.
Respectfully, this bickering must stop and we need to focus on resolution.
The underlying dispute was the objection to the use of an anonymous poll. The main objection (at least from my understanding) was the anonymous part which leads to inaccuracies and potential abuse.
What was supposed to be a constructive attempt to resolve the dispute informally became embroiled in procedural objections. Instead of making an effort to resolve conflict by listening to the objections involved in the appeal, the substantive discussion was aborted so a “record” could be created.
The result was a continued delay of the matter.
Of course this also means that the WG CONTINUES TO BE STALLED. Why the process must be stalled because of the insistence to use anonymous polling is rather confusing to me. It would appear that time is better spent actually moving forward and seeking to determine consensus in an open and transparent manner.
As said, my 2 cents.
Paul Keating
Sent from my iPad
On 12 Jan 2018, at 18:17, Corwin, Philip via Gnso-igo-ingo-crp <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>> wrote:
The call transcript can be found at https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/79429635/transcript%20Discussion%20George%E2%80%99s%20appeal%20under%20section%203%207%20GNSO%20WG%20guidelines%20%2011%20Jan%202018.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1515769818000&api=v2
For the record, I disagree with George's characterization that he was "interrupted immediately".
What occurred was that George submitted a 12-page document with 28 footnotes that arrived by email just 76 minutes prior to the start of the call. I had no opportunity to read much less consider its content prior to the call.
When the call commenced I asked for mutual agreement that, given the length of the document and the fact that it arrived without advance notice, the co-chairs be accorded the courtesy of being given a few days after conclusion of the call to fully consider its contents and to respond in writing if they wished to do so. I expected this request to be noncontroversial but it proved otherwise.
Philip S. Corwin
Policy Counsel
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way<https://maps.google.com/?q=12061+Bluemont+Way+%0D+Reston,+VA+20190&entry=gmail&source=g>
Reston, VA 20190
703-948-4648<tel:(703)%20948-4648>/Direct
571-342-7489<tel:(571)%20342-7489>/Cell
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
-----Original Message-----
From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 11:09 AM
To: gnso-igo-ingo-. <gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Invitation to a call with the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Working Group co-chairs
Hi folks,
The archive of yesterday's call, to appeal the use of anonymous polling within this working group has been posted by ICANN. Notice how my presentation was interrupted immediately, and then we got completely bogged down by process issues. Another call is scheduled for next week.
https://community.icann.org/display/...+Working+Group
[The best link to use is the "AC Recording" (shows the chatroom, and audio, as well as ability to jump back/forth using the controls at the bottom).]
Have a nice weekend!
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269<tel:(416)%20588-0269>
http://www.leap.com/
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:43 AM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com<mailto:icann at leap.com>> wrote:
Hi folks,
In the spirit of transparency, attached is documentation for the basis
of the Section 3.7 appeal (meeting today at noon Eastern time, as
previously noted), for the benefit of all members of this PDP.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269<tel:(416)%20588-0269>
http://www.leap.com/
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:33 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com<mailto:icann at leap.com>> wrote:
Just confirming receipt of the invitation to a call on Thursday, 11
January 2018 at 17:00 UTC for 60 minutes.
(09:00 PST, 12:00 EST, 17:00 London GMT, 18:00 Paris CET) that I was
sent off-list. If others interested in the Section 3.7 appeal want to
attend, presumably they can contact ICANN Staff (Mary, etc.) for the
relevant passcode/invite and call-in details.
Have a nice weekend!
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269<tel:(416)%20588-0269>
http://www.leap.com/
_______________________________________________
Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list
Gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/20180116/4b003e22/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-igo-ingo-crp
mailing list