Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion

[Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think this question of AND versus OR on languages is moot now that IOC/ICRC 
have proposed their "Language Solution":

Dear Jeff and all:

The RCRC and IOC representatives met this afternoon as requested, to discuss 
the languages to be included for the String Similarity Review on the top-level 
and for the first round only.

The RCRC and IOC have agreed to limit the languages submitted for String 
Similarity Review on the top-level and for the first round to those set forth 
in the Applicant Guidebook in Section 2.2.1.2.3.  The parties have decided to 
proceed this way in the spirit of cooperation and for purposes of expediency, 
understanding that the parties both assert that the list of languages as set 
forth in the Applicant Guidebook in Section 2.2.1.2.3 is only illustrative and 
the denominations have broader protections in other languages that may be 
asserted in future rounds and at the second level.  We hope that this spirit of 
cooperation will resolve the discussions that have been held on the languages 
issue and will help move this proposal forward to consensus.

Accordingly, as this list has been previously verified, we recommend that the 
last sentence of Recommendation 2 relating to vetting of the list be deleted.

Respectfully submitted,

Christophe Lanord, Debra Hughes, Jim Bikoff, Kiran Malancharuvil and Stephane 
Hankins


From: Konstantinos Komaitis 
<k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:37:32 +0000
To: J Evans <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>>, Joy 
Liddicoat <joy@xxxxxxx<mailto:joy@xxxxxxx>>, Jeff Neuman 
<Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>>, Chuck Gomes 
<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: "gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion


This morning we did not agree on this issue of 'or' or 'and'. My understanding 
is that we left it in a status of 'undecided' and I think it should remain as 
such, considering that we hardly discussed it.

Thanks

Konstantinos

From: "J. Evans" 
<jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:52:28 +0000
To: Joy Liddicoat <joy@xxxxxxx<mailto:joy@xxxxxxx><mailto:joy@xxxxxxx>>, Jeff 
Neuman 
<Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>>,
 Chuck Gomes 
<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
Konstantinos Komaitis 
<k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: 
"gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>"
 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion


I disagree.

------------------------------
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 2:09 PM PDT Joy Liddicoat wrote:


Thanks Jeff - we will discuss at the NC constituency day tomorrow. In the 
meantime, my personal view is that the reference to "or" in Recommendation 2 
("under International Treaty or  applicable national laws") is clearly outside 
the rationale of the GAC letter and, imho, the reference should be "and"
Regards
Joy


-----Original Message-----
From: 
owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, 13 March 2012 9:16 a.m.
To: Gomes, Chuck; Konstantinos Komaitis
Cc: 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion

Here is the latest version with the duplicative language removed.  This is 
still a redline to the original motion.



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.


-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 1:47 PM
To: Neuman, Jeff; Konstantinos Komaitis
Cc: 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion

I assume you will send the redline version Jeff?  I think that would be helpful 
to make it clear what the amendments would be.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: 
owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-
dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:dt@xxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Neuman, 
Jeff
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 3:38 PM
To: Konstantinos Komaitis
Cc: 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion
Ok.  That is fine.  I will then send this motion out as the latest one
so that all constituencies have it.
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.
-----Original Message-----
From: Konstantinos Komaitis [mailto:k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 12:44 PM
To: Neuman, Jeff
Cc: 
<gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Proposed Revised Motion
Thanks Jeff-it would be difficult to come back to you by tonight.
Considering that tomorrow is dedicated to constituency day I would
suggest we send to this group our views by tomorrow lunch time so we
have time to discuss this with our members.
Thanks
KK
Sent from my iPhone - excuse any typos
On 12 Mar 2012, at 12:11, "Neuman, Jeff"
<Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx><mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote:
All,
Sorry for the delay, but enclosed please find a revised motion on the
IOC / RCRC as we discussed this morning.  Please provide your input
today so that tonight I can send out the “final one” to the Council
for everyone to consider during constituency day.
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><mailto: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.
<IOC RC MOtion.docx>