Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Qualification Criteria - common ground?

[Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Option A is my preference.

Thanks,
Robin Gross


On Feb 7, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:

> All,
> as discussed during yesterday's call, I would like to sound out  
> whether there is some common ground with respect to the  
> qualification criteria regarding the following proposals developed  
> during the call. These suggestions seemed to have some supporters  
> each:
> Option A:
>
> Protection of a name or an organization by virtue of an  
> international treaty AND protection in multiple jurisdictions.
> Option B:
>
> The existence of a name, acronym or designation by virtue of an  
> international treaty AND the requirement of the organization to be  
> mandated to work in the global public interest.
> (Note: It was proposed that the global public interest can be shown  
> by existing protection under multiple national laws).
>
> I repeat my encouragement to continue our vivid exchange of  
> thoughts on the mailing list. Please let the group know whether you  
> like both or one or a variation of the above or none of the options.
> This exercise should help us find out whether we can use one or  
> both options as a starting point for developing a proposal  
> supported by a considerable part of the group.
> Thanks,
> Thomas



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