Re: [gnso-contactinfo-pdp-wg] URGENT Correction to Recommendation 4 - REPLY NEEDED!

[James Galvin <jgalvin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I was there during the presentation to the GNSO Council when this was 
discovered.
I believe this was an editorial misstep on the part of the working group 
and that there was no intention to suggest such a material change to 
obligations that are beyond the remit of this working group.
I support the change as proposed below.

Jim




On 6/20/15 4:10 PM, Lars Hoffmann wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Please all read this careful and*try to reply on list as soon as possible*.
>
> It has come to our attention that there was an important term mistakenly
> used in Recommendation #4 of our Final Report
>
> The Recommendation reads currently:
>
> */Recommendation #4/*/ The Working Group recommends that, regardless of
> the language(s)/script(s) used, it is assured that the data fields are
> consistent to standards in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA),
> relevant L Policy, Additional Whois Information Policy (AWIP) and any
> other applicable polices. Entered contact information data are
> verified, in accordance with the aforementioned Policies and Agreements
> and the language/script used must be easily identifiable./
>
> */Level of consensus: Full Consensus/*
>
> The term ‘verified’ in the second sentence of the recommendation has
> legal implications and would change significantly the contractual
> obligations of the Contracted Parties. As the substance of the Final
> Report on that particular issue makes it clear that "validation" was
> intended to be used instead of “verification”. Both  co-Chairs agree
> that this is a clerical mistake as the Group meant to use the
> term ‘validate’ _not_ ‘verifiy’ and it should be changed accordingly.
>
> With your consent we would like change the working to reflect the actual
> meaning of what the Group meant to recommend. In order to prevent
> delaying the GNSO Council’s vote on our Final Report, this would have to
> happen as soon as possible so that the Motion to adopt can be changed
> accordingly and in time for Wednesday’s Council discussion and vote.
>
> Many thanks and best wishes,
>
> Lars