ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[bc-gnso]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [bc-gnso] DAGv4 Public Comment Period ends in 8-days

  • To: Ron Andruff <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'bc - GNSO list'" <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] DAGv4 Public Comment Period ends in 8-days
  • From: "Fares, David" <DFares@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:33:52 -0400

Thanks Ron.  I think it would be helpful for the BC to weigh-in.

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ron 
Andruff
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:50 AM
To: 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] DAGv4 Public Comment Period ends in 8-days
Importance: High


Dear all,



I wanted to bring to the attention of the BC members that the DAGv4 Public 
Comment period is coming to a close Wednesday, in one week (July 21st).



We commented on four aspects in our post regarding DAGv3 (found here: 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/3gtld-guide/msg00147.html ), to whit:



*         ICANN Staff Recommendations for Rights Protection Mechanisms



*         Translations of Strings from ASCII to Other Scripts or Languages



*         Revised Comparative Evaluation Scoring



*         Market Differentiation Between New gTLDs



While I do not know (and would like to hear from others that are better 
informed) what happened with regard to our first issue, RPMs, I do know that 
our other three comments were wholly ignored by staff.



I would submit to the members that we need to repost our comments with some 
stronger language to ensure that staff hear and react to the BC's concerns.  
Whatever happens, we have one week to submit our comments.



Comments/thoughts?



Kind regards,



RA



Ronald N. Andruff

President

RNA Partners, Inc.

220 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10001



+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11







-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Mike O'Connor
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:09 AM
To: bc - GNSO list
Subject: [bc-gnso] Policy question -- does the BC want to develop a position on 
the current IRTP draft?





subject says it all.  IRTP-B is in public-comments.  does the BC have a view?



mikey





- - - - - - - - -

phone             651-647-6109

fax                   866-280-2356

web     http://www.haven2.com

handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)


This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or
confidential information. It is intended solely for the named
addressee. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
(or responsible for delivery of the message to the addressee), you
may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments to anyone.
Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its
attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any
content of this message and its attachments that does not relate to
the official business of News America Incorporated or its
subsidiaries must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by any
of them. No representation is made that this email or its
attachments are without defect.



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy