[council] RE: GNSO Council follow up on ICANN staff recommendation to the ICANN Board in response to the WIPO-II recommendations

["Paul Verhoef" <paul.verhoef@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce, we have had a discussion with WIPO and they have promised us a detailed 
commentary on the
results of the WG. We have not yet received that. Once it is in, and in 
accordance with the
provisions you mentioned (see below), we will provide a recommendation to the 
Board. We have
contacted WIPO with a request to speed up in view of the remaining time.
I trust this is useful to you 
Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 28 October 2004 03:56
To: paul.verhoef@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Kurt Pritz (E-mail); John Jeffrey (E-mail); Paul Twomey-ICANN (E-mail); 
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: GNSO Council follow up on ICANN staff recommendation to the ICANN 
Board in response to the
WIPO-II recommendations

Hello Paul,

At the last Council teleconference, a question was raised regarding the 
follow-up to the last Board
resolution on WIPO from the KL meeting.  The GNSO Council wishes to know what 
recommendation the
ICANN staff will be making to the Board for the meeting in Cape Town.

From: http://www.icann.org/minutes/kl-resolutions-23jul04.htm

"WIPO II President's Working Group Recommendation .....
Resolved [04.61], that the President and staff should proceed to investigate 
and analyze the Working
Group's Report and the General Counsel's advice on the legal aspects of the 
relationship between
ICANN's mission and the 21 February 2003 WIPO letter.

Resolved [04.62], that following the investigation and analysis, President and 
Staff should produce
a recommendation to the Board before the Cape Town Meeting, so that the Board 
may make its decision
on the WIPO II recommendations during that meeting."

Note the last GNSO Council resolution on this topic was from its teleconfernece 
on 17 April 2003:
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20030417.GNSOteleconf-minutes.html

"To consider the WIPO recommendations separately from the review of the 
existing Universal Dispute
Resolution Policy (UDRP) which is aimed at trademarks.
That the WIPO recommendations associated with Names and Acronymns of 
International Intergovernmental
Organisations and Country Names should be subject to a policy development 
process to look at how
they can be implemented taking into account a thorough examination of the 
issues surrounding the
recommendations."


Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
Chair, GNSO Council