Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] For FINAL review - IRTP Part B Final Report - deadline 29 May 2011

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

ah.  yep - i agree with your thought James.  much more neutral language….

so the revised-new version would be;

"A TEAC must be requested in a timely manner, within a reasonable period of 
time following the alleged unauthorized transfer."

m

On May 25, 2011, at 8:21 AM, James M. Bladel wrote:

> Good catch, Mikey.  
> 
> One other thought:  Do we want to say "unauthorized loss" when really
> all we have is a claim or suspicion at this point?  Perhaps "alleged
> unauthorized transfer"?
> 
> Am I over-thinking this?
> 
> Thanks--
> 
> J.
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] For FINAL review - IRTP Part B Final
> Report - deadline 29 May 2011
> From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, May 25, 2011 8:14 am
> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> hi all,
> 
> i've attached a copy of the draft with a few changes. i started with a
> clean draft so's to highlight the little nits i picked out.
> 
> there's only one substantive change. i made the following change in the
> three places that this sentence appeared…
> 
> old:
> 
> "A TEAC must be requested by the registrant in a timely manner, within a
> reasonable period of time following the unauthorized loss of a domain"
> 
> new:
> 
> "A TEAC must be requested in a timely manner, within a reasonable period
> of time following the unauthorized loss of a domain"
> 
> so i'm striking the words "by the registrant" -- the reason i'm
> suggesting this is that the TEAC cannot be requested by the registrant,
> only the registrar.
> 
> all the rest of the changes are mostly just nits or formatting. i also
> highlight one section that should be reviewed once Simonetta and James
> finish up on their language.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> mikey
> 
> 
> 
> On May 25, 2011, at 4:45 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> You'll find posted on the wiki 
>> (https://community.icann.org/display/gnsoirtpb/For+Review+by+29+May+2011) 
>> the latest version of the Final Report. This version includes the changes 
>> discussed on our call yesterday (including amongst others: changing 
>> Emergency Action Channel to Transfer Emergency Action Contact; updated notes 
>> to reflect WG discussion and conclusion on 60-day lock recommendation; 
>> updated TEAC FAQ).
>> 
>> This version does not include updated language to reflect that the 60-day 
>> lock should be considered as part of the Issue Report on 'change of control' 
>> (recommendation #4) as discussed yesterday, which will be circulated later 
>> today on the mailing list for your review and comment by James / Simonetta. 
>> In addition, it does not include any language Barbara may submit to convey 
>> that in the case of a transfer undo registries will update the registrar of 
>> record to its previous state.
>> 
>> Apart from the updated recommendation in relation to the 60-day lock which 
>> you will have the opportunity to review separately, the report notes that 
>> all the recommendations listed currently in the report have the full 
>> consensus support from the Working Group.
>> 
>> Please review the latest version of the Final Report. You are encouraged to 
>> share any comments/edits/suggestions you may have as soon as possible but no 
>> later than COB 29 May 2011. The objective is to submit this report to the 
>> GNSO Council and for publication on Monday 30 May 2011.
>> 
>> With best regards,
>> 
>> Marika
> 
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone 651-647-6109 
> fax 866-280-2356 
> web http://www.haven2.com
> handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
> etc.)
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)