RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Languge Issue Solution

["Joy Liddicoat" <joy@xxxxxxx>]

I actually think option 2 is a good idea, thanks Greg.

Joy

 

From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Shatan, Gregory S.
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2012 7:10 a.m.
To: Hughes, Debra Y.; Neuman, Jeff; Kiran Malancharuvil;
gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jim Bikoff; shankins@xxxxxxxx; christophe.lanord@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Languge Issue Solution

 

Is the appropriate change:

 

1.  To remove the last sentence of Proposal 2

2.  To remove all of Proposal 2 (referring to as many languages as
feasible), or

3.  To edit Proposal 2 to support the utilization only of the languages set
forth in the AGB?

 

Leaving the rest of Proposal 2 doesn't seem to make sense to me, since it is
at odds with the proposed change below.  Thus, I would suggest the amendment
should be either 2 or 3 above.

 

Greg

 

Gregory S. Shatan 
Deputy Chair| Tech Transactions Group 
IP | Technology | Media 
ReedSmithLLP 
The business of relationships
599 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
212.549.0275 | Phone
917.816.6428 | Mobile
212.521.5450 | Fax
gshatan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.reedsmith.com 

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Hughes, Debra Y.
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 2:04 PM
To: 'Neuman, Jeff'; Kiran Malancharuvil; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jim Bikoff; shankins@xxxxxxxx; christophe.lanord@xxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Languge Issue Solution

Jeff,

The email was sent to the Drafting team email list (gnso-iocrc-dt.org).  Is
there another list?

Debbie

 

 

Debra Y. Hughes 

Senior Counsel  

 

American Red Cross

2025 E Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20006

202.303.5356 (p)

202.303.0143 (f)

Debra.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 1:55 PM
To: Kiran Malancharuvil; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jim Bikoff; Hughes, Debra Y.; shankins@xxxxxxxx;
christophe.lanord@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Languge Issue Solution

 

Thanks for this.  Can I ask that you please send this to the full drafting
team list so we can amend the 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.

 

 

From: Kiran Malancharuvil [mailto:kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 4:12 PM
To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Neuman, Jeff; Jim Bikoff; debra.hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx; shankins@xxxxxxxx;
christophe.lanord@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Languge Issue Solution
Importance: High

 

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

 

 

Kiran J. Malancharuvil

Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, L.L.P.

Georgetown Place, Suite 120

1101 30th Street NW

Washington, DC 20016

(202) 944-3307 - Office

(619) 972-7810 - Mobile

kmalancharuvil@xxxxxxxxx

 

 

 

* * * 

 

This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may
well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on
notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then
delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for
any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for
your cooperation. 

* * * 

To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you
that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice
contained in this communication  (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local
provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
tax-related matters addressed herein. 

Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03

pdc1