Re: [gnso-whoissurvey-dt] WSWG - Doodle for 16 April 2012

[Cintra Sooknanan <cintra.sooknanan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Everyone,

I know Berry is currently working on the draft. By no means do I intend to
duplicate his work, but following our call this week I have a few
additional modifications and comments (highlighted in yellow). Some of
these are simple and can be incorporated in Berry's revision, but my
comment to R10 would require discussion:

*R7 *

 2. Should WHOIS clients display result of queries in both U-label and
A-label for the

domain names?

[  ] Yes

[  ] No

[  ] Indifferent

*R10*
7a. If Yes, what should be the retention range?
[  ] 6 months
[  ] 1 year
[  ] 2 years
[  ] 5 years
In all jurisdictions there are statutory time limits to legal actions being
brought, these are called limitation periods. Limitation periods are
sometimes explicitly stated in laws or come about based on common law; and
vary depending on the liability (civil or criminal) and actual charges.
Should we suggest retention range time limits in line with some typical
limitation periods?

By way of example and further explanation the limitation periods are not
specifically defined in ICT legislation in my jurisdiction (Trinidad and
Tobago)  but arise via other laws, such as
*-3 years *after commission of the offence or* 1 year *from its discovery,
whichever is earlier s.45 Consumer Protection and Safety Act;
-*4 years* from the date on which the cause of action accrued and *12
years* after
the date of final judgment s.3 Limitation of Certain Actions Act
... etc.

I suggest that this section is modified to include ranges of years that we
consider to be typical limitation periods (we can seek advice from legal on
this) such as 1 year, 3 years, 4 years, 6 years; but as well include an
'Other' checkbox with room (256 characters) for explanation.


*R11*
-Numbering of questions to fit formatting of other sections (i.e. instead
of A. B. etc should be 1. 2. etc)

-Questions A. and B. can both include  0 = Indifferent and 'do you think it
is' can be replaced with 'is it'
===============

Thank you very much for your review and input.

Regards

Cintra Sooknanan





On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> WSWG,****
>
> ** **
>
> Our call for 16 April 2012 is confirmed at 19:00 UTC.  Here is the latest
> draft survey.  I consolidated two different versions into v0.8.3 (Cintra’s
> edits +new R7 & R10).  You will find a redline and a clean version.****
>
> ** **
>
> I will send out an agenda in the coming days.  Thank you.  B****
>
> ** **
>
> Berry Cobb****
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)****
>
> 720.839.5735****
>
> mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx****
>
> @berrycobb****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owner-gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> owner-gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Cintra Sooknanan
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 08, 2012 09:33
> *To:* Berry Cobb
> *Cc:* gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx; Nathalie Peregrine
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-whoissurvey-dt] WSWG - Doodle for 16 April 2012****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi everyone, ****
>
> ** **
>
> I made some changes to the version 7 of the survey, had some difficulty
> with the R-7 section in terms of breaking down the requirements into
> questions.****
>
> ** **
>
> I don't have editing rights to the wiki page, but I'm hoping this this
> version 8 of the survey can be placed on a child page in it's entirety and
> comments can be added there to ensure capture.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards****
>
> ** **
>
> Cintra Sooknanan****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:***
> *
>
> WSWG,****
>
>  ****
>
> Please complete the following Doodle poll to determine availability for
> the 16 April 2012 session.  http://www.doodle.com/26vp25eqk4rc3sfu****
>
>  ****
>
> 20:00 UTC is our original time, but I also included an option for 19:00
> UTC just in case.****
>
>  ****
>
> By the 16th, we will have our 1st full draft of the survey ready for
> review.  Since our last session, R7 now has six questions based on the
> IRDWG’s initial report recommendations.  Lastly, I am working with Don to
> finish R9 & R10 in the format of other questions.  Once we complete these
> two sections, I will send out the latest draft early next week.****
>
>  ****
>
> After review of the latest draft, we should be ready for the questions to
> be loaded into the survey tool and prepare to submit the draft to the GNSO
> Council and open a public comment period. ****
>
>  ****
>
> A few other actions the WSWG will consider at our next session:****
>
> ·         Identify a few candidate survey test-takers****
>
> ·         Final editors of survey draft****
>
> ·         Webinar & Public Comment****
>
> ·         Independent review, post GNSO Council submission and public
> comment****
>
>  ****
>
> Thank you and see you on the 16th.  B****
>
>  ****
>
> Berry Cobb****
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)****
>
> 720.839.5735****
>
> mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx****
>
> @berrycobb****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>