<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Summing up Option 7
- To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Konstantinos Komaitis <k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Joy Liddicoat" <joy@xxxxxxx>, "gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Summing up Option 7
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:33:14 +0000
I think we are all in agreement to consult with the GAC so we can let them tell
us once we have a proposed recommendation to give them. In the meantime, any
clarification of this would be helpful as Jeff has requested.
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> [mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 4:56 AM
> To: Konstantinos Komaitis; Neuman, Jeff; Joy Liddicoat; Gomes, Chuck;
> gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: AW: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Summing up Option 7
>
> Jeff:
>
> I don't know enough about this to know whether GAC members would
> welcome the reference to WIPOs work especially where it seemingly could
> go against aspects of their latest proposal. Leaving the amorphous
> concept in our proposal, especially when not baked into law in most
> global jurisdictions, seems to me to be a controversial concept. If I
> am wrong, please let me know.
>
>
>
> Wolfgang:
>
> WIPO is an observer in the GAC. Best thing is to involved them directly
> into the discussion.
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|