[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] CONSENSUS CALL on the WG's Recommendations and Remaining Options

George Kirikos icann at leap.com
Wed Jun 6 15:33:40 UTC 2018

Hi again,

In my prior email,


it looks like I omitted a sentence when I was copying/pasting things
into my email client, from my text editor. In particular, when I was
writing about evidence-based policymaking in the context of subsidies:

> If we are to be engaging in evidence-based policymaking (and that
> should be the standard), then that is evidence we should not be
> ignoring (i.e. the inability to show that the costs are too high).
> Furthermore, we know from the Swaine report that IGOs have used the
> UDRP numerous times, so that too is evidence that the fees haven't
> been a barrier to the past usage of the UDRP (and the fees for the URS
> are much lower). See:

I should have prefaced the above with a sentence:

"We asked the GAC to provide feedback to us about whether the fees for
UDRP/URS procedures were at levels that were not justified, and did
not receive evidence from them."

That would have been what I was referencing when I wrote about the
"inability to show that the costs are too high", i.e. since we
specifically asked for evidence from the GAC about that.


George Kirikos

More information about the Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list