[Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Public Display of Possible Consensus

[Jay Chapman]

I also support Option 4

Opt 1: I would support.
Opt 2: I would support.
Opt 3: I do not support.
Opt 4: I support
Opt 5: I would support.
Opt 6: I would support.

Sincerely,
Jay Chapman

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Nat Cohen <ncohen at telepathy.com> wrote:

> Dear WG Members,
>
> I'll include a personal comment that our work here has been hampered by
> the lack of participation from the IGOs, on whose behalf this WG was
> formed.  Despite all the work, time and effort that this WG has devoted
> over many years, we do not know whether any of the proposed options would
> actually address the root concerns of the IGOs.  Indeed even if we adopted
> option 3, which would lead the WG down a long, tortured path to try to
> develop an arbitration system, if the IGOs maintain their resistance to
> participating, we would still be left not knowing whether the final
> recommendations would be deemed acceptable by the IGOs.  It seems better to
> refer the core issues of jurisdiction and legal process to the RPM WG which
> enjoys more robust representation from a variety of stakeholders and will
> need to address these same issues as part of its work.
>
> I support Option 4, and would also support continued exploration of
> Options 1, 2, 5, or 6, if one of those options attracted consensus support
> of the WG.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nat Cohen
>
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Zak Muscovitch <zak at muscovitch.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear WG members, I confirm that I support Option 4, which I had earlier
>> proposed to the WG, and would also support Options 1, 2, 5, and 6.
>>
>> Zak Muscovitch
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gnso-igo-ingo-crp [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-crp-bounces at icann.org] On
>> Behalf Of George Kirikos
>> Sent: May-07-18 2:43 PM
>> To: gnso-igo-ingo-.
>> Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo-crp] Public Display of Possible Consensus
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Since there's been no response to the call for the true numbers to be
>> posted:
>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2018-May/001140.html
>>
>> let's attempt to do this transparently. I believe we might already have a
>> consensus.
>>
>> The 6 options (not mutually exclusive!) were at:
>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/2018-March/001093.html
>>
>> Briefly:
>>
>> Option 1: set aside the UDRP/URS decision, to put both sides back in the
>> same position
>>
>> Option 2: use Option 1 for existing domain names, and Option 3 for newly
>> created domains
>>
>> Option 3: arbitration
>>
>> Option 4: refer it to the RPM PDP
>>
>> Option 5: lock the domains in the event of an "in rem" lawsuit (not just
>> "in personam")
>>
>> Option 6: mediation as a step, and then back to Option 1 if need be
>>
>> If you'd like to post your position/thoughts in an open and transparent
>> manner, please do so in this thread, using the following template
>>
>> ----------------------------------
>>
>> Name:
>> Option 1:
>> Option 2:
>> Option 3:
>> Option 4:
>> Option 5:
>> Option 6:
>>
>> ----------------------------------
>>
>> For myself:
>>
>> Option 1: yes, I support this (ultimately my first choice)
>>
>> Option 2: yes, I can support this as a compromise
>>
>> Option 3: no, I can't support this
>>
>> Option 4: yes, I can support this; Paul Keating's prior suggestion of
>> having Option 1 be the interim solution if Option 4 is
>>
>> Option 5: yes, I support this, and it works in parallel to all other
>> options
>>
>> Option 6: yes, I support mediation
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> George Kirikos
>> 416-588-0269
>> http://www.leap.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo-crp/attachments/20180508/cd79312c/attachment-0001.html>