Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
Thanks, J. Scott. However, in the revised version the recommendation of the
WG for a termination or suspension no longer carries any specific weight.
Was that intentional?
With best regards,
Marika
From: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday 10 January 2013 22:03
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne"
<AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>,
"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
Dear All:
Taking into account Marika's comments on the rationale, I have deleted the
sentence that requires a public comment when the termination or suspension
is recommending by the Working Group. Will this work?
J. Scott
j. scott evans - head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. -
408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
To: J. Scott Evans <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>; "Aikman-Scalese, Anne"
<AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>; Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>;
"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:50 AM
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
All, I noticed that the proposed language significantly changes the current
language in relation to the termination of a PDP and I thought it may be
helpful to explain the original rationale of the PDP-WT for its approach
(and I'm sure Jeff and/or Avri who were part of the PDP-WT will chime in if
I got it wrong). It concerns the proposed section that reads 'The Council is
required to conduct a public comment forum seeking community input on the
report first prior to conducting a vote'. In its current form, a public
comment forum on the termination of a PDP is only required if there is no
recommendation from the PDP WG for such termination. As discussed by the PDP
WT at the time, the idea was that if there was consensus from the WG to
terminate the PDP and supermajority support from the GNSO Council to do so,
there would be no need for additional public comment. Only if there would
not be support from the PDP WG to terminate the PDP, the Council would be
required to conduct a public comment forum to obtain community input on
whether or not to terminate the PDP. I hope this helps inform your
discussions on this topic.
With best regards,
Marika
From: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday 9 January 2013 22:56
To: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>, Julie Hedlund
<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
Anne, et. al.
I have attached a recommend revision to the last paragraph.
J. Scott
j. scott evans - head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. -
408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx
From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: 'Julie Hedlund' <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>;
"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 8:07 PM
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
Ron, Avri, et al,
Attached please see the draft J. Scott and I put together regarding the
requirement for a report on termation or suspension. This is for discussion
under Item 6 of the agenda below.
Thank you,
Anne
Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
Lewis and Roca LLP • Suite 700
One South Church Avenue • Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
Tel (520) 629-4428 • Fax (520) 879-4725
AAikman@xxxxxxxxx • www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman
<http://www.lewisandroca.com/Aikman>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information
intended only for the individual or entity named within the message.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If this communication
was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete
theoriginal message.
From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 3:03 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Agenda for SCI Meeting 09 January
Dear SCI members,
On behalf of the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, Ron Andruff and Avri Doria, below
is a proposed agenda for the SCI meeting tomorrow, Wednesday, 09 January
2013 at 2100 UTC>
Please let us know if you have any questions, comments, or changes.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
Agenda, SCI Meeting, Wednesday, 09 January 2013 at 2100 UTC
1. Roll call (1 min)
2. Statement of Interests (1 min)
3. Approval of the agenda (1 min)
4. Chair/Vice Chair elections and terms and SCI Charter changes (10 mins)
5. Action on Working Group survey (10 mins)
6. Termination and Suspension of a PDP (15 mins)
7. GNSO Council Liaison to the SCI (5 mins)
8. Whether the SCI should solicit work or take on work from the GNSO
Council (5 mins)
9. Re-submitting a motion ‹ Background Discussion (10 mins)
10. AOB (2 mins)
For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to
www.lewisandroca.com <http://www.lewisandroca.com/> .
Phoenix (602)262-5311 Reno (775)823-2900
Tucson (520)622-2090 Albuquerque (505)764-5400
Las Vegas (702)949-8200 Silicon Valley (650)391-1380
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone.
In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you
that if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended
or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the
purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.
Attachment:
image001.gif Attachment:
smime.p7s
|
