RE: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Final version of the straw man prior to incorporation in the Initial Report

["Schneller, Matt" <Matt.Schneller@xxxxxxxxx>]

Seems like that would work to me.  If the settlement involves the respondent 
keeping the domain, the complainant would just dismiss the proceeding and the 
registrar wouldn't be involved anyway (other than through the usual termination 
/ unlocking procedures).

Matt Schneller | Attorney | Bracewell & Giuliani LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6200, Seattle, WA 98104-7043 
T: 206.204.6241 | F: 800.404.3970 | C: 206.679.1895
matt.schneller@xxxxxxxxx | www.bgllp.com/schneller


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Luc SEUFER
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 1:48 PM
To: Marika Konings
Cc: Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Final version of the straw man prior to 
incorporation in the Initial Report


Hi Marika,

I am strongly supporting this proposal.

I would however tweaked it a tad:

(1) parties ask for suspension, (2) parties settle, (3) parties inform 
provider, (4) provider issues order to registrar to change the holder details 
or delete the domain name (5) that change or deletion happens, (6) complainant 
confirms change or deletion is complete, and (7) provider dismisses case"

All the best,

Luc

Le 1 mars 2013 à 16:26, Marika Konings 
<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>> a écrit :

Dear All,

Following yesterday's meeting, please find attached the 'final' version of the 
straw man proposal which includes the changes discussed during the meeting. 
Please note that with regard to recommendation #10, a suggestion was made by 
Matt on how to handle a possible confirmation of a settlement: "Timeline could 
be something like: (1) parties ask for suspension, (2) parties settle, (3) 
parties inform provider, (4) provider issues order allowing registrar to unlock 
for the sole purpose of (whatever the settlement is), (5) that change happens, 
(6) parties confirm change is complete, and (7) provider dismisses case". 
Everyone is encouraged to provide their feedback on this proposed approach on 
the mailing list in order to determine whether it should be incorporated in the 
straw man or whether it is possibly something to raise for specific community 
input as part of the Initial Report.

This version of the straw man will now be incorporated in the Initial Report 
(normally early next week), so that the WG can start reviewing the Initial 
Report as a whole (which may still include minor adjustments or changes to the 
recommendations).

With best regards,

Marika




<Final Straw Man Proposal ­ 1 March 2013.doc>


________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have 
received this e-mail by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and 
delete it from your system. You must not copy the message or disclose its 
contents to anyone.

Think of the environment: don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

--------------------------------------------------------