Liz, thank you for the time and effort you put into this WG and the
report. Regarding section 3:
2. Do not agree. I would agree if it was slightly modified to read:
"That each new gTLD that uses RPMs should adopt..."
3. Do not agree. Would agree with this version:
"That the Legal Rights on which a party bases its participation and
seeks to protect in an RPM MUST be subjected to actual authentication,
regardless of whether such rights are challenged."
I realize that it is too late to rehash number 3 above. But the slight
change I suggest to 2 should be fairly uncontroversial. It will be the
new gTLD committee that ulimately decides whether to recommend that
new gTLDs MUST, MAY, or SHOULD use RPMs. So the slight change to 2
it applicable whichever way they go.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-pro-wg] Final Report: Last call
From: Liz Williams <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, June 01, 2007 2:20 am
This is a last call for responses to the Report. In particular, look
at section three and let me know ASAP if you support, as an
individual, the proposed recommendations. I will be closing off the
report ASAP to enable it to be distributed to the GNSO Committee
prior to the 7 June conference call.
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob