Re: [bc-gnso] Update on TM Rights Protection Mechanisms Negotiations

[Liz Williams <lizawilliams@xxxxxxx>]

support Mikey's position -- the way you're doing it is the way forward!
On 29 Oct 2009, at 17:04, Mike O'Connor wrote:

> you've got my support.  keep at it Zahid.  this is precisely the  
> kind of behavior we need if we're to break out of the "old habits,  
> old fights" mindset that so clogs the arteries of ICANN.
> mikey
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2009, at 11:56 AM, Zahid Jamil wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Met with ALAC reps today for an hour before the STI meeting.  We  
> > found common ground on nearly all essential BC positions.   
> > (facilitated by Alan – ALAC Liaison).
> > The actual STI meeting took place in a very conducive atmosphere.   
> > The unreasonably short time line set by the Board was discussed.   
> > My feeling is we may have spent too much time on process (40  
> > mins).  Jeff Neuman, Jon Nevett and I voiced our desire to get on  
> > with the substantive discussions.  Issues were listed and it was  
> > decided that we would focus on them in our discussions over calls.   
> > The group has asked staff to provide information on whether there  
> > will be support available for a face to face meeting as several  
> > members feel some of these issues may not be solvable otherwise.
> > After the meeting I spent an hour with NCSG and ALAC.  We seem to  
> > have common ground on several of the essential BC positions.  NCSG  
> > requested these not be discussed publicly yet.  They are also  
> > attempting to see if I can meet with Wendy tomorrow (she as absent  
> > due to her Board meetings).  The meeting with her will probably be  
> > important in ensuring that the common ground seemingly achieved is  
> > maintained.
> > One issue that Registrar and Registry reps did not support was the  
> > notion of a post launch IP Claims service.  However, this is on the  
> > issues listed to be discussed.
> > On another note my sense is that my outreach and attempts to  
> > discuss matters with ALAC and NCSG does not seem to attract any  
> > support (in fact in some respects I sense the opposite).  This is a  
> > cause for concern.
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Zahid Jamil
> > Barrister-at-law
> > Jamil & Jamil
> > Barristers-at-law
> > 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> > Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> > Cell: +923008238230
> > Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
> > Fax: +92 21 5655026
> > www.jamilandjamil.com
> >
> > Notice / Disclaimer
> > This message contains confidential information and its contents are  
> > being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are  
> > not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute  
> > or copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender immediately by e- 
> > mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it  
> > from your system. The contents above may contain/are the  
> > intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and  
> > constitute privileged information protected by attorney client  
> > privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment,  
> > modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including  
> > photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means  
> > whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of  
> > this communication) without prior written permission and consent of  
> > Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
> > From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On  
> > Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
> > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 12:14 AM
> > To: 'bc - GNSO list'
> > Subject: [bc-gnso] Update on TM Rights Protection Mechanisms  
> > Negotiations
> > Today the 3 days of off line negotiations and reaching out to the  
> > ALAC and NCSG on the issue of the IRT Report and the RPMs were  
> > successful.
> > 3 hours of discussion (with the help of the ALAC- Alan and Cheryl)  
> > on Monday with NCSG reps (Kathryn Kleiman and Konstantinos  
> > Komaitis) followed by discussions through yesterday were successful  
> > in providing background and a context to the BC position on the IRT  
> > Report.
> > Initially on the Council list the NCSG had indicated and  
> > unwillingness of the IRT being available as a resource.
> > Summary of points for discussion that were discussed were (subject  
> > to them being taken back to the NCSG):
> > Welcome the IRT and other resources being available to the GNSO  
> > Working Group working on the Board’s letter regarding the RPMs (ie.  
> > STI review team).
> > At the session on Thursday (today) express the willingness that  
> > NCSG had for reaching out constructively to the GNSO community  
> > (language discussed included reaching common ground).
> > The GNSO passed a Resolution today with the support of the NCSG  
> > stating:
> > The assistance of members of the IRT in answering questions about  
> > the IP Clearinghouse and Uniform Rapid Suspension System  
> > recommendations may be useful to this work. The GNSO Council  
> > requests that members of the IRT who worked on those  
> > recommendations be available to answer any such questions that may  
> > arise;
> > I believe that possibly a more integral part than the discussion  
> > with Kathy in achieving this was the efforts of members from other  
> > Constituency(s) that may have helped mediate this resolution through.
> >
> > In today’s session on Trademark Protection and new gTLDs  
> > (transcript attached):
> > Kathy responded positively and at the end of her first intervention  
> > stated:
> > ‘....we in the NCUC want to work with you.  We want to establish  
> > common ground, and we wish the best of luck for all of us in this  
> > expedited process.’
> > She even went as far as saying in regards the IRT URS  
> > recommendation for Appeal:
> > ‘.....and I have to say it, and I guess I'm on the record, the IRT  
> > kind of got this one right and let's go back to that.’
> > This was met with equal good will by CSG members:
> >
> > J. Scott, now President of the IPC said:
> >
> > ‘I worked with Kathy Kleiman, and we drafted the UDRP final version  
> > with Louis Touton and a group of other talented people, many of  
> > whom are here today................We just want to solve a  
> > problem.  That's what we're here to do.  We want to work with  
> > registries, registrars, NCUC.  That's what we're here for.  We're  
> > problem solvers.  We want to solve the problem.  Thank you for the  
> > opportunity, and we look forward to working together in the near  
> > future.
> > Zahid Jamil BC Councillor said:
> >
> > ‘First of all, I would like to acknowledge and thank Kathy for the  
> > NCUC's constructive invitation to work with goodwill.
> > We look forward to the sentiment continuing in the GNSO.  So thank  
> > you for that..........’
> > With respect to several aspects of the IRT Solutions it seems that  
> > NCSG and BC may be able to find common ground.
> > I am sure there must have been much discussion in the NCSG itself  
> > about taking these positions after discussing matters with the BC  
> > and other individuals. So Kudos to Kathy and Kostantino for  
> > achieving success for not letting down our discussions from Monday  
> > for which I have thanked them.
> > Efforts of Alan and Cheryl to set up some of the atmosphere for the  
> > interaction also helped.
> > Also in other private discussions this evening with some ALAC reps  
> > it seems that there may be even more common ground possible with  
> > the BC positions.
> > This sentiment seems to have created an atmosphere which may enable  
> > some parties with divergent views reaching consensus on some  
> > aspects at least.  I hope this interaction will also help BC, NCSG  
> > and ALAC collaborating on other issues in the future.
> > Through private meetings tomorrow leading up to the STI session I  
> > hope this sentiment continues.
> > Will report back after tomorrows STI meeting.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Zahid Jamil
> > Barrister-at-law
> > Jamil & Jamil
> > Barristers-at-law
> > 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> > Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> > Cell: +923008238230
> > Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
> > Fax: +92 21 5655026
> > www.jamilandjamil.com
> >
> > Notice / Disclaimer
> > This message contains confidential information and its contents are  
> > being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are  
> > not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute  
> > or copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender immediately by e- 
> > mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it  
> > from your system. The contents above may contain/are the  
> > intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and  
> > constitute privileged information protected by attorney client  
> > privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment,  
> > modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including  
> > photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means  
> > whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of  
> > this communication) without prior written permission and consent of  
> > Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone   651-647-6109
> fax             866-280-2356
> web     www.haven2.com
> handle	OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,  
> Google, etc.)