[gnso-igo-wt] FOR REVIEW & DISCUSSION: UPDATED Draft Initial Report (EPDP on Specific Curative Rights Protections for IGOs)
Justine Chew
justine.chew.icann at gmail.com
Fri Aug 27 12:22:22 UTC 2021
Hi Mary, all,
Here are some comments to the Draft Initial Report for consideration, set
out in order of where they appear in the document.
1. Preamble. This is the only place where the phrase/term "an
administrative domain name dispute resolution process" appears. Can we be
more explicit in indicating that this refers to the UDRP or URS off the
bat?
2. Page 6, section 1.2.1, 1st para, last sentence. The presence of
"demonstrate" and "adequately demonstrated" in the same sentence is rather
distracting. Can we just say, " ...... will provide clearer eligibility
requirements for IGOs *to establish* they have adequately demonstrated
rights ...."
3. Page 8, 2nd para, last sentence. Same issue with point 2 above. Perhaps
some consistency should be applied to both this sentence and the sentence
referred to in point 2 above.
*Page 10 onwards, the section on Binding Arbitration.*
4. Para i -- I'm somewhat concerned it isn't sufficiently clear that the
IGO Complainant's agreement to binding arbitration is *conditional* to the
registrant also agreeing to binding arbitration. Since the IGO Complainant
has to commit first, the phrase at the end i.e. "where the registrant also
agrees to arbitration" presents ambiguity as to whether the IGO Complainant
is bound by its agreement (i.e. consent) to binding arbitration in the
event the registrant doesn't agree to the same. Perhaps phrasing along the
lines of, "the IGO Complainant's agreement only becomes effective when the
registrant also agrees" or "is conditional on the registrant also agreeing"
would prove useful. I don't believe anyone in this EPDP thinks that an IGO
Complainant should be unconditionally bound by its agreement to binding
arbitration. (Unless there is some procedural provision that the IGO
Complainant can withdraw its agreement any time before agreement of the
registrant is secured.)
5. Para ii and elsewhere. I was hoping that the issue I had raised
regarding URS would have been addressed in this latest draft. It may be as
simple as indicating that implementation of an URS panel decision doesn't
change unless and until the relevant registrar receives a final
determination (whatever that's called) that requires reversal of the
implementation, but I will leave it to staff to confirm the consequences.
6. Para iii. Per the issue with URS, adjustment would also be needed to the
flow chart but I suspect the adjustment may also be minor. I do hope we can
simplify the flow chart and use consistent terms like "Binding Arbitration"
to avoid any confusion.
I am having difficulty "seeing" the distinction between the two options
simply by reading the [text] so I look forward to appreciating how staff
proposes to address this better in due course.
That's all for now.
Thanks,
Justine
On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 at 16:42, BECKHAM Brian via gnso-igo-wt <
gnso-igo-wt at icann.org> wrote:
> Thanks Mary, all,
>
>
>
> I think in light of the last call, and the revised text (where nothing is
> highlighted), maybe we can get rid of this at 2.1.1: “(Added emphasis to
> highlight that in addition to feedback on the entire Initial Report, the
> Work Track is specifically seeking public comment on this element.)”
>
>
>
> On page 13, I do not think it was just IGOs that had raised this concern,
> so perhaps the original wording is more accurate .
>
>
>
> Regarding the text moved to page 19, could we please add this (including
> the parens) at the end of the sentence: “(others felt that arbitration was
> sufficiently in keeping with the instructions that any recommendations be
> generally consistent with the prior PDP recommendations”).
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-igo-wt <gnso-igo-wt-bounces at icann.org> * On Behalf Of *Mary
> Wong via gnso-igo-wt
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 26, 2021 8:06 PM
> *To:* gnso-igo-wt at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-igo-wt] FOR REVIEW & DISCUSSION: UPDATED Draft Initial
> Report (EPDP on Specific Curative Rights Protections for IGOs)
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> At Chris’ request, and to facilitate your review of the Draft Initial
> Report from this EPDP team, staff has prepared an updated version that
> incorporates the substantive proposed revisions that Brian had sent to this
> mailing list on Monday and which also reflects the GNSO Council’s
> initiation of the EPDP and the outcomes of this group’s Monday call. *Please
> see the first attachment, showing these updates in “redline” format*. You
> should see Brian’s proposed edits and the subsequent staff updates in two
> different colors, with the staff updates under my name.
>
>
>
> To further assist with your review of the actual text of the preliminary
> recommendations as they currently stand, we have extracted the language
> (including the square-bracketed options under consideration) for
> Recommendation #1 and Recommendation #2A, #2B and #2C – *please see the
> “clean” text in the second, separate attachment*.
>
>
>
> Please also note the following as you review this latest draft report:
>
> 1. The substantive text of the preliminary recommendations (Section
> 2.1) is essentially identical to the language that we sent to you following
> the Monday call; you will see that we have retained a few staff action
> items in the document, since, from the staff perspective, we think it will
> be easier to figure out how to best clarify the options and portray the
> “fork” in the arbitration path when we’re in a position to offer a clean
> version of the language in question. In addition, the IGOs have also
> provided a proposed flow chart that you can see in the redlined report.
> 2. The draft report includes the new definition of IGO Complainant (as
> discussed on Monday’s call); as such, staff has removed all prior
> references to a lack of agreement amongst the EPDP team on the scope of the
> definition.
> 3. You should only need to closely review Sections 1, 2 and 3. There
> is some redlined text in Section 4.1, which follows from alternative text
> in the previous sections about how to describe immunity and court review,
> so we can easily update that paragraph after there’s agreement on what the
> text should actually say.
>
>
>
> Thank you. We look forward to working with you to finalize the Draft
> Initial Report in time to meet our agreed deadline to publish it for Public
> Comment in early September.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve, Berry & Mary
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>
> *Date: *Monday, August 23, 2021 at 7:53 PM
> *To: *Chris Disspain <chris at disspain.uk>, "gnso-igo-wt at icann.org" <
> gnso-igo-wt at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Following up on today's meeting (EPDP - Specific Curative
> Rights Protections IGOs for 23 Aug 2021 15:00 UTC Meeting)
>
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
>
>
> As Chris indicated in his note (below), please find attached the mark-up
> of the Draft Initial Report that Brian sent to this list, which staff has
> updated as follows. We have incorporated: (1) the updated definition of
> “IGO Complainant”; and (2) the language that Brian, Alexandra and David had
> proposed to this list (with a small update to address Paul’s concern as
> noted via email) regarding the outcome of court proceedings where an IGO
> has not waived immunity and the result is that the court declines to assume
> jurisdiction.
>
>
>
> Both additions can be reviewed in Section 2 of the attached document
> (starting on Page 8). Staff has made notations in the document about other
> updates and action items that we will work on this week as well; you can
> clearly see the staff notes as comments under my name.
>
>
>
> We apologize in advance if the redline is difficult to read; however,
> maintaining this format shows more clearly all the suggested edits from
> Brian and the IGO representatives. As mentioned, we will be grateful if you
> can send your concerns and issues for discussion to this list rather than
> mark up the redline; if helpful, you may wish to mention the relevant
> section and/or page number along with your comments.
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve, Berry & Mary
>
>
>
> *From: *gnso-igo-wt <gnso-igo-wt-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Chris
> Disspain via gnso-igo-wt <gnso-igo-wt at icann.org>
> *Reply-To: *Chris Disspain <chris at disspain.uk>
> *Date: *Monday, August 23, 2021 at 12:40 PM
> *To: *"gnso-igo-wt at icann.org" <gnso-igo-wt at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-igo-wt] Agenda EPDP - Specific Curative Rights
> Protections IGOs for 23 Aug 2021 15:00 UTC Meeting
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> Thank you for a very productive call today. Mary, Steve and Berry will
> send the 'next draft' of the document out soon. It will be the red line
> submitted by Brian et al with some additional red lines discussed today and
> explanatory notes where text is still being worked on by staff (the 2c
> recommendation for example).
>
>
>
> Please take the time to consider the original text, the ‘Brian et al'
> suggested amendments and the additional staff redlines and provide
> comments, agreements or disagreements on the list. Also, please raise any
> other points so we can address them as well.
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
> chris at disspain.uk
>
> +44 7880 642456
>
> PastedGraphic-2.tiff
>
>
>
> On 20 Aug 2021, at 22:33, Berry Cobb via gnso-igo-wt <
> gnso-igo-wt at icann.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear EPDP - Specific Curative Rights Protections IGOs,
>
> Please see below the proposed agenda for the meeting scheduled on *23 Aug
> 2021 15:00 *UTC.
>
> - Roll Call & SOI Updates (2 minutes)
> - Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (10 minutes)
>
>
> - GNSO Council procedural decision [gnso.icann.org]
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/2020-current*20210819-2__;Iw!!PtGJab4!tWQbOrM9QmEVWfhoLK6s-9_KNkDTvCTRfV9C2aq-YB-4rX7W0m7_ZmBGZR4YWgTZrYPkN-E$>
> to maintain Work Track progress via Expedited Policy Development Process on
> Specific Curative Rights Protections for Intergovernmental Organizations
>
>
> - Continue Discussion of Working Proposals & Preliminary Conclusions
> (75 minutes)
>
>
> - Group discussion & confirmation of proposed text on IGO privileges
> and immunities submitted by Brian, Alexandra & David (see
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-wt/2021-August/000199.html
> *)*
> - Staff overview & group discussion of Draft Initial Report (see
> Executive Summary (pp. 2-6); Preliminary Recommendations (pp. 7-11);
> Proposed Impact Analysis (pp. 11-12):
> https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-wt/2021-August/000194.html
> *)*
>
>
> - Next steps & closing (3 minutes)
>
>
> - Next meeting 30 August 2021 @ 15:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> GNSO Policy Staff[image: Image removed by sender.]
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-igo-wt mailing list
> gnso-igo-wt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
>
>
>
>
> World Intellectual Property Organization Disclaimer: This electronic
> message may contain privileged, confidential and copyright protected
> information. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please
> immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail and all its
> attachments. Please ensure all e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses
> prior to opening or using.
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-igo-wt mailing list
> gnso-igo-wt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-wt/attachments/20210827/9b5fcad0/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-igo-wt
mailing list