RE: [bc-gnso] UPDATE: FOR REVIEW AND VOTE: Alternative positions for ACDR proposal as UDRP Provider

[amack <amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I support #2 as well

Andrew A. Mack
Principal
AMGlobal Consulting

+1-202-642-6429  amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx
2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW  First Floor
Washington, DC 20036
www.amglobal.com

________________________________________
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Tim Smith 
[tim.smith@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2013 3:45 AM
To: John Berard
Cc: Steve DelBianco; bc - GNSO list
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] UPDATE: FOR REVIEW AND VOTE: Alternative positions for 
ACDR proposal as UDRP Provider

I support #2

Sincerely
Tim Smith
General Manager
www.cipa.com<http://www.cipa.com>

On 2013-04-05, at 9:18 AM, John Berard 
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

I will vote for #2, but I'd like to add that the BC does it because of our 
studied view of the specific application.

Berard

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 4, 2013, at 4:51 PM, Steve DelBianco 
<sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Two updates to the review/vote I circulated on 2-April (below):

1. Benedetta sent minutes & transcript of 28-March call among BC members and 
representatives of ACDR 
(link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg03236.html>)

2. ACDR later circulated written answers to several of the questions discussed 
on the call (link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg03237.html>)

Remember: Please review and reply with your vote before 12-April.

--Steve


From: Steve DelBianco 
<sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 12:03 AM
To: 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW AND VOTE: Alternative positions for ACDR proposal 
as UDRP Provider

ICANN has called for comments regarding ACDR's proposal to serve as a UDRP 
provider 
(link<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/acdr-proposal-01mar13-en.htm>).
  The comment period ends 13-Apr.  (UDRP is the Uniform Domain Name Dispute 
Resolution Policy)

Note: ACDR is the Arab Center for Domain Name Dispute Resolution, and is 
affiliated with BC Member Talal Abu-Ghazaleh.

Phil Corwin and Nat Cohen volunteered as rapporteurs for these comments.  We 
circulated Phil's initial draft on 20-Mar.  The BC held a conference call on 
28-March with ACDR representatives to discuss the first draft (transcript 
available on request).

As a result of that discussion, the BC is now considering two alternative 
positions:

Version 1:  The existing BC position, with no comment on the merits of ACDR's 
proposal.  This would maintain the present BC position that no new providers 
should be approved until ICANN has standards for UDRP administration.

Version 2: Amend the present BC position and give "Qualified Endorsement" to 
ACDR's proposal.
This alternative repeats the BC's prior rationale for ICANN to develop 
standards for UDRP administration.  It then modifies the prior position to 
acknowledge that ICANN may approve ACDR's proposal since they have acknowledged 
process concerns, answered questions, and agreed to adopt any standards ICANN 
develops.  The endorsement is "qualified" in that the BC requests ICANN to 
develop standards for UDRP administration, and suggests a staff-driven process 
with community input.

Voting:

BC members should vote for either Version 1 or Version 2.

To vote, please reply to this email indicating your support for Version 1 or 
Version 2.

Voting will close on 12-April so that we can submit the comment on 13-April.

Per our charter, a simple majority prevails and the required quorum is 50 
percent of paid BC members.

As always, members can REPLY ALL at any time to share their views on this issue.

Steve DelBianco
Vice chair for policy coordination
<BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v1].docx>
<BC Comment on ACDR proposal as UDRP provider [v2].docx>