RE: [gtld-council] Objection criteria
- To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gtld-council] Objection criteria
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:38:11 -0400
I think that the RN-WG Controversial names report may be helpful in this
regard. Some excellent thought was provided in the report that could be
beneficial to the dispute process in the overall process.
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:29 AM
> To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gtld-council] Objection criteria
> As the questions in the open forum provoke - i think this is
> an area where we are still wildly hand waving.
> Perhaps this is worth small WG/editing team effort to create
> some proposed language for establishing guideline on who has
> standing, how the objection is judged valid, how the question
> is passed off to the review team etc...