RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Are you stating:

1.  There should be no verification unless the right is challenged, and
therefore, there is no cost; or

2.  There should be verification regardless of whether the right is
challenged, but the claimant should only pay for it if challenged.

In either case, however, I don't recall that there was even a level of
support.

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & Business Development 

NeuStar, Inc. 



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 8:00 AM
To: gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report

I think there was at least support, if not agreement, that cost of
verification is unnecessary (for registry and claimant) unless the legal
right is challenged.  So it must be subject to verification, but need
not actually be verified unless a challenge.

Mike Rodenbaugh

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:34 PM
To: PRO WG
Subject: Re: [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report

hi,

On 24 maj 2007, at 02.54, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:

>
>
> Second, sec 4.1.3 and 4.1.6 seem generally the same principle, I  
> would delete 4.1.6 or characterize it as an Alternative View.
>
>

I agree there is overlap, but i would be more comfortable with  
leaving 4.1.6 and removing 4.1.3 as 4.1.6 is the stronger statement  
and I can think of no case or reason why a claimant to Legal Rights  
would not have to be able to have their claims verified.

a.