ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-sti] Draft STI Report

  • To: "'GNSO STI'" <gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-sti] Draft STI Report
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:27:00 -0500

Margie, I have a number of items that I am checking with Olivier on first, but in 4.3, "stings" should probably be "strings" (unless you have slipped in an editorial comment here!) ;-)

At 05/12/2009 04:45 PM, Margie Milam wrote:

Hi Olivier

Sorry, I didn't mean to create a new category. Rough consensus should = broad consensus--- I'll make those changes.

All the Best,


From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 2:33 AM
To: Margie Milam; 'GNSO STI'
Subject: Re: [gnso-sti] Draft STI Report

Thank you for this, Margie. Just a quick note, at first glance: you define "rough consensus" but use the term "broad consensus" in the table. Is this the same? Which one did we all prefer?

Warm regards,


----- Original Message -----

From: <mailto:Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>Margie Milam

To: <mailto:gnso-sti@xxxxxxxxx>'GNSO STI'

Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 5:46 AM

Subject: [gnso-sti] Draft STI Report

Dear All,

Attached for your review is the first draft of the STI Report, that includes only the Trademark Clearinghouse recommendations. I will send the remainder of the document with the URS descriptions this weekend.

Best Regards,



Margie Milam

Senior Policy Counselor



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>