<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><span></span>
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 14 Sep 2021, at 04:14, Mary Wong via gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">
Hello Jay and everyone,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">We’re targeting 1600 UTC at the latest for any additional feedback, to enable ICANN’s Public Comment team to open the proceeding on time. As mentioned below, staff is not anticipating any substantive or major change to the last version of the Initial Report
that we sent out to the EPDP team just prior to the weekend. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Bearing in mind that this is an Initial Report for which the EPDP team is seeking feedback, we expect that the team will discuss the content and text of a proposed final report once it’s had a chance to review the Public Comments submitted. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">We hope this helps clarify where things stand at this stage for the work at hand. Thank you!</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Cheers,</div>
<div class="">Steve, Berry & Mary </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Sent from a mobile phone, apologies for errors and brevity</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On Sep 13, 2021, at 17:36, Jay Chapman <<a href="mailto:jay@digimedia.com" class="">jay@digimedia.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">What time tomorrow are comments to these new suggested edits due?<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Also, we have not seen the wraparound content of the draft - in particular - the executive summary, where many relevant and useful suggestions were provided to provide accurate context so the community may fully understand. When will that be updated and
sent for review?</div>
</div>
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class=""><font face="Arial" class=""><span style="font-size:13.6364px" class=""><br class="">
</span></font></div>
<div class=""><font face="Arial" class=""><span style="font-size:13.6364px" class="">Sincerely,</span></font></div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" class=""><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" class=""><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" class=""><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" class=""><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" class=""><font class=""><font face="Arial" class=""><font color="#0000F8" style="font-size: 10pt;" class=""><span style="" class="">Jay
Chapman</span><b class=""><br class="">
</b></font></font></font></span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:59 PM Mary Wong via gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;" class="">
<div class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal">Dear all,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Thank you for the productive and constructive discussion earlier today. We are attaching – in clean and redlined format - what we believe is final text for the preliminary recommendations and various options under consideration that will
go into the Initial Report. We hope we have managed to capture all the suggestions, agreements and changes discussed on the call today. We have also accepted all but one of Alexandra’s suggestions (below); the only one that we have not changed, after some
consideration, is the suggestion to move the text about providing information about applicable arbitral rules (in Recommendation #4 (ii) and correspondingly in #5(ii), as edited by Chris) to a footnote as we thought it might create confusion as to what is,
and isn’t, “officially” a recommendation.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">We will proceed to update the draft Initial Report with the comments that Alexandra and Brian sent via email. In the absence of any further comments, we will request that ICANN org’s Public Comment team publish the report, as updated, tomorrow
as planned so that we can meet our goal of closing the 40-day Public Comment period by the time ICANN72 begins.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Thank you all!<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Cheers<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Steve, Berry & Mary <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in" class=""><p class="MsoNormal"><b class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">From: </span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">"<a href="mailto:Alexandra.EXCOFFIER-NOSOV@oecd.org" target="_blank" class="">Alexandra.EXCOFFIER-NOSOV@oecd.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:Alexandra.EXCOFFIER-NOSOV@oecd.org" target="_blank" class="">Alexandra.EXCOFFIER-NOSOV@oecd.org</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Date: </b>Monday, September 13, 2021 at 9:40 AM<br class="">
<b class="">To: </b>Mary Wong <<a href="mailto:mary.wong@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">mary.wong@icann.org</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Cc: </b>"<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a>><br class="">
<b class="">Subject: </b>[Ext] RE: [gnso-igo-wt] FOR DISCUSSION: Updated draft preliminary recommendations and options<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class=""><p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class="">Dear Mary,</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class="">This looks quite good. See some comments below, mainly technical ones from our arbitration expert. OK also with Chris’ changes.</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class="">I have not had time to review the full report yet.</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class="">Regards,</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class="">Alexandra</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
<div style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-left:none;border-bottom:1pt solid windowtext;padding:0in 0in 1pt" class=""><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1" class="">
<li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 3 -- suggest that “In relation to the UDRP/URS” be bolded and underline to show this is the same text for each para for the respective RPM (stylistic suggestion)</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.ii -- suggest “it agrees” instead of “they agree”</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.ii -- suggest moving the entire “The request shall include information regarding the applicable arbitral rules…” sentence to a footnote as we really want public comment on the main thrust of the
recommendation.</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.iii -- suggest “agreed to arbitration” should be “filed a request for/notice of arbitration” (or equivalent) to match the text of Rec 4.iv</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.iv -- suggest to delete “If the UDRP provider receives notice that an arbitration proceeding has been initiated, it shall promptly inform both parties and the relevant registrar.” Because Rec 4.iii
(and the UDRP) directs the applicable notice to the registrar, not the UDRP provider</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.v and vi -- suggest adding something like “In lieu of mutual agreement to arbitration as described in 4,I and 4.ii, where the registrant instead initiates…” for clarity</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.v.option 1 -- is “jurisdiction over” the right terminology? Could be discussed as lack of jurisdiction is a broader concept than lack of jurisdiction due to immunities. A priori, ok with both</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.v option 2 -- footnote 9 should appear at iii or iv</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 4.v option 2 -- should add notice to the UDRP provider (see note 5 above)</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://4.vi__;!!PtGJab4!tnQTuOqcL-wMMGAxCCS9ZZGcjERAEMFfqgP1Ulo0hccQbvIowZ9T908F3PthxAfptahqxAE$" target="_blank" class="">
4.vi [4.vi]</a> -- suggest deleting brackets and replace “and” with “or” or with “and/or”</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 6.ii -- should add <b class="">
<u class="">e.g.</u></b> -- “does not <b class=""><u class="">e.g.,</u></b> have a satisfactory cause of action”</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 6.iii.d -- should add “in the discretion of the arbitral panel” (to match the UDRP)
</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="gmail-m_-3779869039491340282MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in">
<span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">Rec 6.iii.d -- as agreed on our last call, the second sentence should be in brackets as an option</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li></ol><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif" class="">In addition, the new footnote 8 does not match the recommendations, since it provides that the registrant can ask for arbitration at any time during the judicial process, while the
recommendation only allows this at the conclusion of the process. Personally, my preference would be for the footnote, but that means that the recommendations should be modified. Also the footnote should indicate the options in their order (1, then 2).</span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)" class=""> </span><u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
<div class="">
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in" class=""><p class="MsoNormal"><b class="">From:</b> gnso-igo-wt <<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">gnso-igo-wt-bounces@icann.org</a>>
<b class="">On Behalf Of </b>Mary Wong via gnso-igo-wt<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b> 09 September, 2021 9:47 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b> [gnso-igo-wt] FOR DISCUSSION: Updated draft preliminary recommendations and options<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
</div>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Dear all,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Please find attached a clean, updated version of the draft preliminary recommendations that this group is attempting to finalize for Public Comment next week, as well as the URS process flow chart that was displayed during Tuesday’s call.
We hope the revised text captures the agreements and feedback from this past Tuesday’s call. As previously, to avoid “competing” texts, please do not send a redline/markup of the document; instead, please feel free to post comments and questions to this list
ahead of Monday’s call.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">As you review the updated text, staff hopes that the following notes are helpful:<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc" class="">
<li class="MsoNormal">We have combined the Mutual Jurisdiction exemption for the UDRP and URS into a single recommendation (which is now Recommendation #3).<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="MsoNormal">We have attempted to highlight the options under consideration even more by labeling them Option 1 and Option 2 (for the UDRP and URS, in what is now Recommendation #4 & #5, respectively.) We have also used yellow highlights in these square-bracketed
options to indicate the differences between the two options in question.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="MsoNormal">All other changes, updates and additions have been indicated via Comments balloons.
<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li><li class="MsoNormal">We have clarified that the question regarding applicable law is not an option to mutual agreement but a possible additional step (in what is now Recommendation #6.)<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></li></ul><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">For the URS process flow chart, we plan on making any necessary updates once the EPDP team has agreed on the text of the recommendations, prior to insertion into the Initial Report.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Staff is currently updating the draft Initial Report to reflect the latest changes and agreements. We will do our best to circulate an updated version as soon as feasible, prior to Monday’s call.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Thanks and cheers<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Steve, Berry & Mary<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
gnso-igo-wt mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" target="_blank" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt</a><br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
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 (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). 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.</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">gnso-igo-wt mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:gnso-igo-wt@icann.org" class="">gnso-igo-wt@icann.org</a><br class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-wt<br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">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.</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>