RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20
- To: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:39:43 -0400
Interesting question Bruce. I will not try to answer for Avri but here
is my response. With the exception of where contention is involved, I
have never envisioned the objection process as a dispute mediation
process, so I guess I see it more as a yes/no approach. I am of course
curious as to what others think.
"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 Bruce Tonkin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 6:43 PM
> To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20
> Hello All,
> > Avri, yes good clarification. We did all intend there to be
> a panel as
> > there is for other objections.
> Is there an intent to take a dispute resolution approach or a
> yes/no approach?
> Ie Once an objector is determined to have standing and to
> have a legitimate complaint, would the approach be to
> encourage the applicant and the objector to attempt to reach
> a resolution (as used by ICANN when there may be a compliant
> about an applicant for a cctld string in the ISO table), or
> is the approach more like the decisions around a string being
> confusingly similar where the result is a yes/no decision
> made by the panel?