Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Need for clarification
Hi Chuck, we were hoping that you and others with more experience with Registry Agreements could look particularly at Resolved clause 4 of the proposed draft motion, which deals with the notion of applying the relevant Consensus recommendations to incumbent/existing registries. While we have some placeholder language there about how these Agreements ought to accommodate the new recommendations, we are not certain if we should go into greater detail as to how this ought to be done; e.g. A new contractual condition, modifying existing Reserved Names Lists, an advisory applicable to all incumbent registries, etc. Thank you so much! Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx * One World. One Internet. * From: <Gomes>, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2013 7:20 PM To: "Berry Cobb (berry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)" <berry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "GNSO IGO INGO (gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx)" <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] Need for clarification > Berry, > > I promised toward the end of the WG call today to respond to a question you > asked me but I need you to repeat it for me. I thought you wanted me to look > at Section 4 of the final report but after doing that I don¹t think that is > correct. Section 4 looks fine to me. > > Chuck > ³This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the > individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information > that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from > disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as attorney work > product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is > strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, notify sender > immediately and delete this message immediately.² Attachment:
smime.p7s
|