<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report
- To: Mike Rodenbaugh <mxr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report
- From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:58:15 -0700
<div>
This is the current draft? I thought Liz was working on an update. So
there will be no indication of who supports what? I'm not trying to be an a$$
about that, I just think it's unusual not to and I believe it will be
an important question raised by the Council. Also, will minority reports
be included? I submitted one on Saturday.</div>
<div><BR><BR>Tim<BR></div>
<div name="wmMessageComp"><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px
solid" webmail="1">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE:
[gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of Report<BR>From: "Mike Rodenbaugh"
<mxr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Wed, May 23, 2007 7:54 pm<BR>To:
<gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx><BR><BR>
<STYLE>
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</STYLE>
<o:SmartTagType name="PersonName"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType>
<STYLE>
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage st1\:* {behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</STYLE>
<STYLE>
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage /* Font Definitions */ @font-face
{font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, #wmMessageComp
#wmMessage li.MsoNormal, #wmMessageComp #wmMessage div.MsoNormal {margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage a:link, #wmMessageComp #wmMessage span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage a:visited, #wmMessageComp #wmMessage
span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage p.MsoPlainText, #wmMessageComp #wmMessage
li.MsoPlainText, #wmMessageComp #wmMessage div.MsoPlainText
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage span.EmailStyle18 {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial; color:navy;}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in
1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
#wmMessageComp #wmMessage div.Section1 {page:Section1;}
</STYLE>
<DIV class=Section1>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
Kristina, this looks really good and I much appreciate all your
effort. I have a few suggested edits in attached doc, and three
substantive issues for potential discussion and clarification.
First,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<P class=MsoNormal style="LINE-HEIGHT: 150%"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 150%">4.1.4: <B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Agreement</SPAN></B>
that if a new gTLD elects to use a Sunrise Process RPM, then it SHOULD
<SPAN style="BACKGROUND: yellow">restrict eligible Legal Rights</SPAN> in such
a manner as to <SPAN style="BACKGROUND: yellow">discourage abusive
registration</SPAN>
. [I don’t understand this 2d clause. Does this mean
Registries should narrow the scope of rights that can be protected, to
discourage gaming of the RPM process? I don’t think there was
Agreement on that.] <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
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.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Third, <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
12pt">4.2.4 <B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Support</SPAN></B>
for the principle that if a new gTLD elects to use a Sunrise Process as
its RPM and second-level names are not awarded on a First-Come, First-Served
basis, then competing applicants MAY be provided with an opportunity to reach
an allocation decision between/among themselves. [I think there was
Support that such an opportunity SHOULD (or even MUST?) be provided. I
see no reason not to provide it.]<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoPlainText style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face=Arial color=black
size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Mike
Rodenbaugh<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<div><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=navy size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
12pt; COLOR: navy"> </SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT face="Times
New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<div><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
owner-<st1:PersonName w:st="on">gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx</st1:PersonName>
[mailto:owner-<st1:PersonName w:st="on">gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx</st1:PersonName>]
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B><st1:PersonName
w:st="on">Rosette, Kristina</st1:PersonName><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT:
bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thursday, May 17, 2007 2:31 PM<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> <st1:PersonName
w:st="on">gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx</st1:PersonName><BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [gnso-pro-wg] Current Draft of
Report</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div></DIV>
<div><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">All,</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
Attached is the current draft of the report. Here's what changed
since last night's version.</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">Added</SPAN></FONT></U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> Kelly's Introduction.</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">Added</SPAN></FONT></U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
definitions. I used the definitions I suggested this morning
minus my subsequent revision to RPM. I indicated that there has not been
discussion of the Rights of Others section.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div>
<div><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">Created</SPAN></FONT></U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
a fee-specific section in Outcomes. All fee-related
principles and proposals are here. Intro makes clear there are no levels
of support.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div>
<div><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">Created</SPAN></FONT></U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
a new RPM section in Outcomes. All new RPM proposals (Peter's,
Mike's, and mine) are here. Intro makes clear that there's been no
decision and there's outstanding work.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div>
<div><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">
Classified all other proposals as Agreement, Support, Alternative
View</SPAN></FONT></U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
. I used the following methodology. I started with the chart
I circulated last night and re-characterized the levels of support based on the
postings today. If only one person objected to a proposal, I
characterized the support as Agreement. If only one person objected to a
proposal and provided their own suggestion, I characterized support for the
original proposal as Agreement and identified the objector's suggestion as
Alternative View. I characterized the level of support as Agreement ONLY
if there was unanimity OR there was only one objection. Please
check these carefully. </SPAN></FONT><B><U><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT:
bold"> </SPAN></U></B><B><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT:
bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Any mischaracterizations ARE NOT
intentional.</SPAN></FONT></U></B> <FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
(Avri, I integrated your comments in #16 in way that I think you would
find agreeable. Please check 4.2.5)) Finally, I listed in
Outstanding work everything that had not been substantively discussed and/or
had not resulted in level of support.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">-*-</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
The report needs formatting clean-up as the spacing and may not be
consistent. I also did not change New RPM Proposals to reflect
agreed-upon terms. I'm sure there's something that I did or did not do
that is not mentioned here. </SPAN></FONT><B><U><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT:
bold"> </SPAN></U></B><B><U><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT:
bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Any and all omissions are
unintentional.</SPAN></FONT></U></B><o:p></o:p></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial">K</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div><FONT face=Arial color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR:
black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
<<05172007 GNSO PRO WG draft report - SCRUBBED on 05-17-07
17_29.DOC>> </SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></div></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|