[gnso-iocrc-dt] FW: [REGYCON] FW: IOC/Red Cross DT: Proposed Narrowing of Options

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

Ricardo Guilherme from the UPU, our newest member of the RySG, gave Jeff & I 
permission to forward this to the discussion group list.  I think you will find 
it relevant to our work.

Chuck

From: regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
GUILHERME ricardo
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 12:15 PM
To: 'regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: DONOHOE paul
Subject: RE: [REGYCON] FW: IOC/Red Cross DT: Proposed Narrowing of Options

Dear Chuck and All,

As promised, please find attached the UPU's submission (concerning matters of 
principle that cannot be ignored by us as an intergovernmental organization), 
which in our view is absolutely necessary to clarify a great number of flawed 
considerations/conclusions contained in the Unredacted Paper, and to duly 
inform any advice to be provided by the RySG (and potentially other involved 
groups) on this extremely important matter.

We would particularly invite Chuck and Jeff to take a careful look at it, 
considering their active participation in the IOC/RC discussion group (please 
feel free to convey the considerations contained in the attached document to 
that group as well). Finally, we stress that this submission, which is sent 
solely in the name of the UPU, will probably be shared also with other relevant 
ICANN groups involved with these issues.

In any case, please let us know if you have any questions - and thank you again 
for the productive discussions today.

With best regards,

Ricardo Guilherme Filho, LL.M., MILE
Expert (Lawyer)
Legal Affairs Directorate

International Bureau
Weltpoststrasse 4
Case postale
3000 BERNE 15
SWITZERLAND

T +41 31 350 35 25
F +41 31 350 31 10

www.upu.int<http://www.upu.int/>

[cid:image001.jpg@01CD8B92.6DE82970]

[cid:image002.jpg@01CD8B92.6DE82970]





De : regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Gomes, Chuck
Envoyé : mercredi 5 septembre 2012 16:39
À : regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Objet : RE: [REGYCON] FW: IOC/Red Cross DT: Proposed Narrowing of Options

Thanks Bret.

Chuck

From: regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]> On 
Behalf Of Bret Fausett
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 10:29 AM
To: regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [REGYCON] FW: IOC/Red Cross DT: Proposed Narrowing of Options
Importance: High

Chuck, I think the message you intended to forward was the one below...

        Bret


From: Bret Fausett <bret@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bret@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
To: "regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:regycon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [REGYCON] FW: IOC/Red Cross DT: Proposed Narrowing of Options

> Hope that helps.

Yes, it does. Thank you. As we've seen so often in ICANN policy development, 
the starting point matters a great deal in determining where the end point is 
drawn. I would rather have us start with no protection and require a PDP to add 
protection than start with protection subject to change by a PDP. When a group 
already has what it wants, it changes the nature of their participation in the 
policy conversation.

        Bret

--


--


--

Attachment: UPU Comments to the Unredacted Paper 05 Sep 12.pdf
Description: UPU Comments to the Unredacted Paper 05 Sep 12.pdf