ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO-INGO PDP WG Action Items

  • To: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO-INGO PDP WG Action Items
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 23:42:04 -0400

Avri, the request was not rejected. We didn't come anywhere near discussing the content of the charter with the exception of the concept of splitting into two groups and the need for an external legal review of laws/legislation.

Happy listening.


At 31/10/2012 09:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

On 31 Oct 2012, at 20:39, Brian Peck wrote:

> <IGO-INGO_WG_WorkPlan_07NOV2012.doc>

As I indicated in my previous note where sent apologies due to conflict:

> One request I would like to make on the issues up-front is that the work items include doing impact analysis (rights, competition etc) on any recommendations made. > I know this is in the defined PDP process, but many of the elements of the PDP are, for example the process to be used, yet we repeat them in the charters of WG. Until such time as impact analysis (rights, competition etc..) is an understood and expect element that needs no mention, I beleive it is critical that it be mentioned.
> In this case I expect that impact analysis goes beyond pro-forma but is substantive given the arguments of the RCRC and others related to to humanitarian principles, human rights and international law.

I will try to listen to the recording to understand why this request was rejected.

In the meantime I request that the following be aded to the Mission and Scope under elements for the final Report

- Impact analysis, including rights, competition and other , for any recommendations made by the WG.



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy