[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Paul Keating's Concensus Votes

Fri Jun 8 16:37:02 UTC 2018

Hi Paul,

Thanks - duly noted!

Best,

Petter
-- 
Petter Rindforth, LL M

Fenix Legal KB
Stureplan 4c, 4tr
114 35 Stockholm
Sweden
Fax: +46(0)8-4631010
Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360
E-mail: petter.rindforth at fenixlegal.eu
www.fenixlegal.eu

NOTICE
This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed.
It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read,
copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains.
Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail.
Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu
Thank you

8 juni 2018 13:51:53 +02:00, skrev Paul Keating <Paul at law.es>:

> Petter and Mary,
> 
> I have been unable to respond to prior emails this week. However, I wanted to reiterate my position regarding the various options. Below is my email of May 8, 2018. My response to #6 was subsequently modified to a Yes, Accordingly, please note my consensus votes as follows:
> 
> Option 1: YES
> Option 2: NO
> Option 3: NO
> Option 4: YES
> Option 5: NO
> Option 6: YES
> 
> In case I am unable to attend the upcoming call please note the above for the record.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Paul Raynor Keating, Esq.
> 
> Law.es <http://law.es/>
> 
> Tel. +34 93 368 0247 (Spain)
> 
> Tel. +44.7531.400.177 (UK)
> Tel. +1.415.937.0846 (US)
> 
> Fax. (Europe) +34 93 396 0810
> 
> Fax. (US)(415) 358.4450
> 
> Skype: Prk-Spain
> 
> email:<Paul at law.es>
> 
> 
> 
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE. THE INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, NO WAIVER OF PRIVILEGE IS MADE OR INTENDED AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO PLEASE DELETE THE EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS.
> 
> 
> 
> Circular 230 Disclosure: To assure compliance with Treasury Department rules governing tax practice, we hereby inform you that any advice contained herein (including in any attachment) (1) was not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed on you or any taxpayer and (2) may not be used or referred to by you or any other person in connection with promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any transaction or matter addressed herein.
> 
> 
> 
> NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS EMAIL SHALL CONSTITUTE THE FORMATION OF AN ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIP; SUCH A RELATIONSHIP MAY BE FORMED WITH THIS FIRM AND ATTORNEY ONLY BY SEPARATE FORMAL WRITTEN ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH THIS IS NOT. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH AN AGREEMENT, NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE
> 
> 
> 
> From: Paul Keating <<Paul at law.es>>
> Date: Tue, May 8, 2018 at 9:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Public Display of Possible Consensus
> To: Paul Keating <<Paul at law.es>>, George Kirikos <<icann at leap.com>>,
> "gnso-igo-ingo-." <<gnso-igo-ingo-crp at icann.org>>
> 
> 
> Having been asked by several people for my reasoning behind my votes, I
> thought I would simply post it openly.
> 
> Option 1: Yes.
> 
> This is a simple solution that returns the process to a balance. It
> leaves the IGO with the complete freedom of choice (just as it had in
> filing the UDRP). The consequence (voiding the UDRP) is a simple and
> easily understood consequence of seeking the benefit of immunity AND does
> not bog us down in discussions as to whether immunity existed or whether
> it had already been waived by the IGO via the UDRP filing.
> 
> Option 2: NO.
> 
> Although a nice attempt to seek compromise, I found it too confusing and
> feared it would lead to us becoming bogged down in discussion over details.
> 
> Option 3: NO.
> 
> I am most opposed to the idea of this WG attempting to create any form of
> alternative dispute system. This is more appropriately addressed by a
> wider and more fully functioning WG such as that addressing the RPM.
> 
> Option 4: YES.
> 
> I am fully in favor of suggesting that the other WG handle this matter.
> They are a larger group with more professionals on board. They are also
> experienced in tackling complex issues. I know this because I am a member
> of both this and the RPM WG.
> 
> Option 5: NO.
> 
> Issues of ³in rem² and declaratory relief are inherently common law
> principles and are not shared by many jurisdictions, including those based
> upon civil law (that which looks only to statutes and not to prior
> judicial decisions as the reference point). This would require too much
> discussion by this WG to achieve true consensus as to what is or is not
> involved in turning this option into the more robust descriptions
> necessary. Also, I have had no difficulty in dealing with post-UDRP
> claims based upon this distinction (suing a party or suing a thing). I
> also am unsure if a US in rem action would be permitted to continue in the
> absence of an IGO that successfully asserted sovereign immunity. So,
> overall, too complex for this WG given its directive.
> 
> Option 6: NO.
> 
> I STRONGLY favor any form of mediation and have previously provided my
> thoughts and concerns over the Nominet program. I ENCOURAGE Brian and
> anyone else (at either WIPO or NAF) to initiate such a program.
> Initiating such a program would not require any modification to to the
> UDRP as it could be entirely voluntary. HOWEVER, to the extent that this
> Option 6 would require discussion and consensus surrounding the rules
> underlying an obligatory mediation program, such is beyond the scope of
> this WG and not likely to have a successful outcome, particularly given
> what has been transpiring in this WG to date.
> 
> So, there you have my thoughts.
> 
> I ENCOURAGE all WG members to respond to George¹s email regardless of your
> views.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Paul Raynor Keating, Esq.
> 
> Law.es <<http://law.es/>>
> 
> Tel. +34 93 368 0247 (Spain)
> 
> Tel. +44.7531.400.177 (UK)
> Tel. +1.415.937.0846 (US)
> 
> Fax. (Europe) +34 93 396 0810
> 
> Fax. (US)(415) 358.4450
> 
> Skype: Prk-Spain
> 
> email: <Paul at law.es>
> 
> 
> 
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY CONTAIN
> INFORMATION SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGE. THE
> INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO
> WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, NO WAIVER OF
> PRIVILEGE IS MADE OR INTENDED AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO PLEASE DELETE THE
> EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS.
> 
> 
> 
> Circular 230 Disclosure: To assure compliance with Treasury Department
> rules governing tax practice, we hereby inform you that any advice
> contained herein (including in any attachment) (1) was not written or
> intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any taxpayer for the
> purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed on you or any
> taxpayer and (2) may not be used or referred to by you or any other person
> in connection with promoting, marketing or recommending to another person
> any transaction or matter addressed herein.
> 
> 
> 
> NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS EMAIL SHALL CONSTITUTE THE FORMATION OF AN
> ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIP; SUCH A RELATIONSHIP MAY BE FORMED WITH THIS
> FIRM AND ATTORNEY ONLY BY SEPARATE FORMAL WRITTEN ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT,
> WHICH THIS IS NOT. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH AN AGREEMENT, NOTHING CONTAINED
> HEREIN SHALL CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20180608/a11a3fdb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20169 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20180608/a11a3fdb/attachment-0001.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 6210 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20180608/a11a3fdb/attachment-0001.png>