Re: [soac-mapo] Objection title

[Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>]

On the matter of describing the title for this Objection.  

There seems to be broad agreement to replace "Morality and Public Order".    I 
think the replacement candidates are:

1.    "Objections Based on the Principles of Ordre Public"  

or its Anglo cousin..

2.    "Public Order Objections"

or..

3.   "Public Interest Objections" --- I recall multiple push-backs on this

or...

4.    "Objections Based on General Principles of International Law'     


I left off my favorite -- "Other Objections" -- as no-one seems to share my 
love for the bland.

I dont think the title has a practical impact on the standard or how it's 
applied,  but I understand the desire for precision (and how a 'bad' title 
might result in mission creep on the standard)

So which of the four above is most accurate??

RT



On Sep 9, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Mary Wong wrote:

> I agree, and note that Richard used the phrase "Principles of Ordre Publique" 
> in an earlier email. I've adopted it in the attached draft recommendation on 
> the use of the term "incitement" (and thank Konstantinos for starting the 
> draft and dredging up the various emails concerning the issue!)
>  
> I've also used the same font as Margie, in the hope it will facilitate 
> editing and insertion.
>  
> Something on Quick Look to follow, shortly .... (I hope :)
>  
> Cheers
> Mary 
>  
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: 
> http://ssrn.com/author=437584
> 
> 
> >>>
> From: Konstantinos Komaitis <k.komaitis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To:   Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>, soac-mapo <soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 9/9/2010 5:55 PM
> Subject:      Re: [soac-mapo] Summary of Issues/Recommendations
> 
> Dear Margie,
> 
> Thanks for this, it is really helpful.
> 
> One point - I think we decided at this point to use the term 'ordre publique' 
> and abandon the term 'public interest' when it comes to objections. I think 
> 'ordre publique' came out of our discussion with Carroll and it is something 
> that Mary also suggested (?).
> 
> Thanks
> 
> KK
> 
> 
> On 09/09/2010 19:33, "Margie Milam" <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Please find enclosed for your review suggested language that summarizes the 
> topics discussed and the proposed recommendations.  Although some of you are 
> working on language to insert in this document, I thought this might serve as 
> a starting point for you.
> 
> It is very difficult to glean all of the details from the email list, so 
> please accept my apologies if I misstated the principles or the 
> recommendations.   Also,  there are areas where I was unable to sketch an 
> outline of the issue or proposed recommendation, such as the Quick Look 
> Procedure, Timing of Rec6 Dispute, and Guidebook Criterion 4.  Hopefully 
> volunteers can assist in describing the issue and proposed resolution.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Margie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the 
> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of New 
> Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have changed 
> and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname@xxxxxxxxxxx. For more 
> information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law, please visit 
> law.unh.edu
> <Rec on Incitement.doc>