<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-lockdomainname-dt] For review & doodle poll
- To: "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-lockdomainname-dt] For review & doodle poll
- From: "Laurie Anderson" <landerson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:34:35 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div>Dear All, </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I have submitted proposed verbiage for #2 as we discussed in the meeting.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div><STRONG>Current verbiage: </STRONG></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Whether the creation of an outline of a proposed procedure which a
complainant must follow in order for a registrar to process a domain lock
request would be desirable</div>
<div> </div>
<div><STRONG>Proposed verbiage: </STRONG></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Whether the creation of an outline of a proposed procedure which a
complainant must follow in order for a registrar to place a domain name on
registrar lock, and the steps of the process that a registrar can reasonably
expect to take place during a UDRP dispute would be desirable. </div>
<div> </div>
<div><STRONG>Alternatively, splitting this up to read: </STRONG></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Whether the creation of an outline of a proposed procedure which a
complainant must follow in order for a registrar to place a domain name on
registrar lock would be desirable. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Whether the creation of an outline of the steps of the process that a
registrar can reasonably expect to take place during a UDRP dispute would be
desirable. </div>
<div> </div>
<div><BR> </div>
<div>Laurie Anderson<BR>Disputes Manager<BR>Domain Services<BR><a
href="http://GoDaddy.com";>GoDaddy.com</a>, LLC<BR>480-366-3009</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=replyBlockquote style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY:
verdana" webmail="1">
<DIV id=wmQuoteWrapper>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject:
[gnso-lockdomainname-dt] For review & doodle poll<BR>From: Marika Konings
<<a
href="mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx";>marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx</a>><BR>Date:
Wed, February 22, 2012 4:32 am<BR>To: "<a
href="mailto:gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx";>gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx</a>"<BR><<a
href="mailto:gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx";>gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx</a>><BR><BR>
<DIV>Dear All,</DIV><SPAN id=OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION>
<DIV>
<DIV style="COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-FAMILY: Calibri, sans-serif; WORD-WRAP:
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14px">Following yesterday's Locking of a Domain Name
Subject to UDRP Proceedings meeting, please find attached the updated draft
charter which includes the modified language and questions that were agreed for
inclusion in the charter template by those attending the meeting. In addition
to any comments / edits to the modified charter, DT members are encouraged to
express their views on whether the following questions should be included in
the Charter:</DIV>
<UL>
<LI><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-FAMILY: Calibri; WHITE-SPACE: pre"
mce_style="font-family: Calibri; white-space: pre;">Whether the creation,
maintenance and publication by ICANN of public e-mail contact information for
all registrars for use with UDRP-related domain lock queries should be explored
[<I>Several members on the call expressed their preference for this question
not to be included as it would likely get addressed should the WG decide to
recommend a standardized process for filing a complaint</I>]</SPAN></LI>
<LI><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-FAMILY: Calibri; WHITE-SPACE: pre"
mce_style="font-family: Calibri; white-space: pre;">Whether the time frame by
which a domain should be unlocked after termination of a UDRP, after the 10 day
wait period, should be standardized [<I>Several members of the call expressed
their preference for this question not to be included as the UDRP already
prescribes a 10 day wait period following which the domain should be
unlocked</I>]</SPAN></LI>
<LI><SPAN class=Apple-style-span style="FONT-FAMILY: Calibri; WHITE-SPACE: pre"
mce_style="font-family: Calibri; white-space: pre;">Whether the standard of the
'locking' of a domain name subject to UDRP should be raised and not be based on
a simple request by the complainant [<I>Several members on the call expressed
their preference for this question not to be included as it was not considered
in scope of the WG. A possible alternative wording is to be suggested by
Konstantinos</I>]</SPAN></LI></UL>
<DIV>Please share your comments and/or proposed edits with the mailing list.
The objective is to try and finalize the charter during next week's meeting. In
order to find the most appropriate time, <B><U>please complete the following
doodle poll: </U></B><A id=participationLink
href="http://www.doodle.com/7b5wf44a65y2mqk2"; target=_blank
name=participationLink>http://www.doodle.com/7b5wf44a65y2mqk2</A>.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Thanks,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Marika</DIV></DIV></DIV></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|