RE: [gnso-res-sga] Proposed discussion outline

["Scoville, Adam" <ascoville@xxxxxxxxx>]

A couple of minor comments on the outline:
- I'm not sure if we are adequately capturing the service of process
issue with the "Valid Trigger for Legal Timelines" item. I'm not sure
it's just a question of timing. It's also an issue of the sufficiency of
the mode of notice. And since this maybe an issue of an agreement or
acknowledgement by the registrant, it also ties back to the
"relationship" section of the outline.

- Under the "What" section, there is the issue of technical vs legal
issues, but there is also the question of concerns about the domain
versus about the use of the domain. Some issues are inherent in what the
domain is (such as, that it mimics a famous brand name) and others may
depend on use (such as phishing attack). Should we discuss which of
these are meant to be included?


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-res-sga@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-res-sga@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:19 AM
To: gnso-res-sga@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-res-sga] Proposed discussion outline

 Subgroup A participants:
Attached (in Word format) please find an outline I have prepared to
structure further discussion of the pending proposals from Steve
Delbianco ( http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-res-sga/msg00007.html) and
Chris Gibson ( http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-res-sga/msg00027.html).
It follows the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, HOW format, but reflects that the first
couple of issues have been more extensively discussed than the last.  It
tries to reflect the discussion on the list and on our calls but of
course there may be issues I have overlooked.  It is intended to
stimulate and structure further discussion, not provide answers.  I hope
it is useful for our call tomorrow, and welcome your responses on list
prior to that (as well as any additional proposals or further comments
on the two that have been put forward).   

Steve Metalitz     



-