[gnso-lockdomainname-dt] For final review - Updated Charter and Motion
Dear All, As requested by Konstantinos, please find attached an updated version of the charter which includes the revised language proposed by Laurie (#1 and #2) and the revised language proposed by Konstantinos (#5). Please share your feedback, whether in the form of support or in the form of comments, questions and/or edits with the mailing list so that we can determine whether there is a need for a call tomorrow (see also items below from last week's call). If there are no objections and no further comments / edits, the charter will be submitted to the GNSO Council for its consideration. As a reminder, I have also attached the proposed motion which is to be submitted to the GNSO Council together with the proposed charter. Comments on this document are also appreciated. With best regards, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:32:46 -0800 To: "gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx>" <gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx>> Subject: [gnso-lockdomainname-dt] For review & doodle poll Dear All, Following yesterday's Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings meeting, please find attached the updated draft charter which includes the modified language and questions that were agreed for inclusion in the charter template by those attending the meeting. In addition to any comments / edits to the modified charter, DT members are encouraged to express their views on whether the following questions should be included in the Charter: * Whether the creation, maintenance and publication by ICANN of public e-mail contact information for all registrars for use with UDRP-related domain lock queries should be explored [Several members on the call expressed their preference for this question not to be included as it would likely get addressed should the WG decide to recommend a standardized process for filing a complaint] * Whether the time frame by which a domain should be unlocked after termination of a UDRP, after the 10 day wait period, should be standardized [Several members of the call expressed their preference for this question not to be included as the UDRP already prescribes a 10 day wait period following which the domain should be unlocked] * Whether the standard of the 'locking' of a domain name subject to UDRP should be raised and not be based on a simple request by the complainant [Several members on the call expressed their preference for this question not to be included as it was not considered in scope of the WG. A possible alternative wording is to be suggested by Konstantinos] Please share your comments and/or proposed edits with the mailing list. The objective is to try and finalize the charter during next week's meeting. In order to find the most appropriate time, please complete the following doodle poll: http://www.doodle.com/7b5wf44a65y2mqk2. Thanks, Marika Attachment:
Locking WG Charter Template - Updated 27 February 2012.doc Attachment:
Approval of a Charter - Draft Motion - 14 February 2012.doc
|