RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Status Report to send to the GAC on Feb 29th

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

If we decide to take the approach of tying the list to signatures of the 
Nairobi treaty, I wonder whether it would make sense to define it that way so 
that any future signatures could also apply?

It would be helpful to me to find out how others in this DT feel about tying 
the list to the Nairobi treaty.  I can't claim to have enough expertise in this 
area to know whether that is a reasonable approach or not.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-
> dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Konstantinos Komaitis
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 12:12 PM
> To: Neuman, Jeff; Novoa, Osvaldo
> Cc: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Status Report to send to the GAC
> on Feb 29th
> 
> Thanks Jeff for your hard work – this is an excellent document. One
> comment under Recommendation 2: I was under the impression that the
> issue concerning the list of languages was not really settled,
> especially given that the addition of more languages appears to be
> going beyond the scope of international law instruments (e.g. the
> Nairobi Treaty, which only has 50 signatories).
> 
> The current language at the end of the first paragraph of
> recommendation 2 reads: "If such a list can be produced, the Drafting
> Team may recommend the use of that list as a substitute to that
> currently in the Applicant Guidebook." - I was wondering whether this
> could be replaced (in line with what has been discussed) with the
> following wording: "If such a list can be produced, the Drafting Team
> will look at the way this list fits within the existing international
> law instruments protecting these terms and determine whether it will
> recommend the use of that list as a substitute to that currently in the
> Applicant Guidebook".
> 
> Thanks again for your hard work on this.
> 
> Konstantinos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Jeff Neuman
> <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:38:29 +0000
> To: "Novoa, Osvaldo" <onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> Cc: "gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>" <gnso-
> iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
> Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Draft Status Report to send to the GAC on
> Feb 29th
> 
> Thanks for the comments. The first comment makes a lot of sense and I
> have changed the wording.  See new revised version.
> 
> The second comment is more substantive, and I am going to ask the group
> if there is anything we can do at this stage to define that more
> clearly.  Does anyone have any suggestions?  If we can get to agreement
> on something in the next day, then I will substitute the new wording.
> Otherwise, we can leave this as a discussion point and resolve over the
> next week.
> 
> Here is what that section states.  Please comment on the highlighted
> portion.
> 
>                                             i.
> If the applied-for TLD is not identical to any of the Modified Reserved
> Names, but fails initial string similarity review with one of Modified
> Reserved Names, the applicant may attempt to override the string
> similarity failure by:
> 
> 
> 1.      Seeking a letter of non-objection from the IOC or the RCRC, as
> applicable; or
> 
> 2.      If it cannot obtain a letter of non-objection, the applicant
> must:
> 
> a.      claim to have a legitimate interest in the string, and
> demonstrate the basis for this claim; and
> b.      explain why it believes that the new TLD is not confusingly
> similar to one of the protected strings and makes evident that it does
> not refer to the IOC, RCRC or any Olympic or Red Cross Red Crescent
> activity.
> 
> 
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
> 
> ________________________________
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient
> you have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
> 
> 
> From: Novoa, Osvaldo [mailto:onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 8:30 AM
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: Draft Status Report to send to the GAC on Feb 29th
> 
> Dear Jeff,
> 
> It is an excellent job.  Thank you very much for your hard work.
> 
> I have consulted my constituency regarding the proposal, Recommendation
> 1, and the only observations I’ve received where:
> 
> Recommendation 1, lit. b.  Where it says “too similar”, we think it
> would be more in line with the applicant guidebook to say “confusingly
> similar”.
> 
> Recommendation 1, lit. c., ii. 2, b.  where it says « any Olympic or
> Red Cross Red Crescent activity », the activities should be define more
> clearly.
> 
> I’m sorry to submit these observations so near the call with the GAC.
> 
> I´ll be on the conversation next Friday.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Osvaldo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [cid:image001.jpg@01CCF5F4.58A93010]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ing. Osvaldo Novoa
> Sub Gerente General
> R.I.I.C.
> ANTEL
> Tel: +598 2928 6444
> E-mail: onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:onovoa@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> De: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
> [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] En nombre de Neuman, Jeff
> Enviado el: Lunes, 27 de Febrero de 2012 06:54 p.m.
> Para: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
> Asunto: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Draft Status Report to send to the GAC on Feb
> 29th
> 
> All,
> 
> As previously discussed, in order to be able to secure the call with
> the GAC on Friday, I had to commit to drafting a status report on the
> current state of affairs with the drafting team and the
> recommendations.  Please find enclosed what I drafted over the weekend
> and let me know if you have any questions, comments or concerns.  It is
> a report from the chair and has no official status.  I put in a bunch
> of disclaimers in the first footnote about that.
> 
> Thanks for your help with this and I look forward to having a
> productive conversation on Friday with interested GNSO Council and GAC
> members.
> 
> 
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
> 21575 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965
> / jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>  /
> www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>
> ________________________________
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
> the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient
> you have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately and delete the original message.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> El presente correo y cualquier posible archivo adjunto está dirigido
> únicamente al destinatario del mensaje y contiene información que puede
> ser confidencial. Si Ud. no es el destinatario correcto por favor
> notifique al remitente respondiendo anexando este mensaje y elimine
> inmediatamente el e-mail y los posibles archivos adjuntos al mismo de
> su sistema. Está prohibida cualquier utilización, difusión o copia de
> este e-mail por cualquier persona o entidad que no sean las específicas
> destinatarias del mensaje. ANTEL no acepta ninguna responsabilidad con
> respecto a cualquier comunicación que haya sido emitida incumpliendo
> nuestra Política de Seguridad de la Información
> 
> 
> This e-mail and any attachment is confidential and is intended solely
> for the addressee(s). If you are not intended recipient please inform
> the sender immediately, answering this e-mail and delete it as well as
> the attached files. Any use, circulation or copy of this e-mail by any
> person or entity that is not the specific addressee(s) is prohibited.
> ANTEL is not responsible for any communication emitted without
> respecting our Information Security Policy.