<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
- To: Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 06:37:22 +0000
Thanks Robin.
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Robin Gross
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:16 PM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
I think we need to understand what the specific problem is in order to evaluate
a specific solution for that problem. Specifically, what it is about the
existing protection mechanisms that have been created that are lacking? How
can we recommend specific solutions if we don't know in which ways the existing
mechanisms are inadequate? We've heard general arguments about how orgs don't
want to spend their resources to exercise the RPM's that have been created to
protect their rights, - but that applies to every org in the world. And we've
heard about the existence of rights created by treaty and national law, but
that hasn't been tied back to why the existing protections don't help to
protect their rights. We need to delve into specifics and into a deeper
understanding of the problem we are trying to fix in order to find a
responsible well considered solution.
Thank you,
Robin
On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:41 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Note that I should have said 'Haven't the RC, IOC, and IGOs defined the problem
as well as the Board and the GAC'?
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:05 AM
To: Robin Gross; gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
Robin,
Haven't the RC, RC, and IGOs defined the problem as well as the Board and the
GAC. Of course that is from their perspective which we should expect, but I am
not sure we need to spend more time defining the problem. I think our time
would be better spent deciding whether think the problem as defined needs a
solution and, if so, what should that solution be.
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robin Gross
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 5:06 PM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
We should also add to the work program a specific discussion on "what is the
specific problem we are trying to solve" as others suggested on today's call.
It may be that there are different understandings as to what the problem is
(for example: are costs too high? is scope not broad enough? some aspect of a
particular RPM inadequate?) We should be discussing the which and how and why
of these issues to understand the specific problem we need to solve, and then
we are in a position to address solutions that problem.
Proposing solutions before identifying the problem is backwards. Seems like we
would be throwing darts in the dark to not have this fundamental discussion up
front.
Thanks,
Robin
On Nov 28, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
NCSG fully supports David's revision since it more accurately reflects the
views expressed, and will focus our work efforts in a more logical formulation
(i.e. not putting the cart before the horse). Thank you.
Best,
Robin
On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:33 PM, David W. Maher wrote:
Attached is my proposed revision of the protections straw-man.
David W. Maher
Senior Vice President - Law & Policy
Public Interest Registry
312 375 4849
From: Berry Cobb
<mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:40:16 -0500
To:
"gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>"
<gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] Protections Strawman - Thomas Rickert
Team,
Attached is a word document for the group to respond and/or suggest changes to
the protections straw-man started by Thomas. Please send your suggestions to
the list and I can incorporate changes into a master document.
Thank you. B
Berry Cobb
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
720.839.5735
mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
@berrycobb
<IGO-INGO_strawman_v0.1[1] dwm rev 28 Nov 2012.docx>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e:
robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e:
robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e:
robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|