Re: [gnso-rap-dt] agenda: RAPWG meeting 26 April 2010, 15:00 UTC

[Rod Rasmussen <rod.rasmussen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am fine with this update - doesn't change the recommendation from a practical 
standpoint, but certainly helps frame all the involved issues a bit better.

Rod

On May 3, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Greg Aaron wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 3:15 PM
> To: Greg Aaron
> Cc: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rap-dt] agenda: RAPWG meeting 26 April 2010, 15:00 UTC
> 
> Greg Aaron wrote:
>> The action items from today's call are:
> ..
> 
>> .         Wendy to suggest language for the UDRP section regarding balanced
>> review
>> 
> 
> Since several of the public comments we received suggested that UDRP
> review consider both its effectiveness against cybersquatting and its
> fairness to non-cybersquatting registrants, and since the comments in
> the Draft Report itself support that balance, I propose the following
> [[bracketed]] changes to Recommendation #1 in 5.1.3:
> 
> 
> The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by
> requesting an Issues Report to investigate the current state of the
> UDRP, and consider revisions [[DELETE: to address cybersquatting]] if
> appropriate. This effort should consider:
> • How the UDRP has addressed the problem of cybersquatting [[ADD: and
> fairness to non-cybersquatting registrants]] to date, and any
> insufficiencies/inequalities associated with the process.
> • Whether the definition of cybersquatting [[in]] the existing UDRP
> language needs to be reviewed or updated.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> --Wendy
> 
> 
> -- 
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
> phone: +1.914.374.0613
> Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law School
> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
> http://www.chillingeffects.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/
> 
>