RE: [council] IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

To get some discussion going, here's some feedback received from David
Maher in the RyC, sent with David's permission.
 
"This proposal still has the fundamental flaw that it requires mandatory
ARBITRATION. It is an attempt to make ICANN a global legislative body
outside the jurisdiction of national courts. The existing UDRP provides
for a mandatory ADMINISTRATIVE proceeding and has the following escape
clause (4(k)):



        Availability of Court Proceedings. The mandatory administrative
proceeding requirements set forth in Paragraph 4 <BLOCKED::#4>  shall
not prevent either you or the complainant from submitting the dispute to
a court of competent jurisdiction for independent resolution before such
mandatory administrative proceeding is commenced or after such
proceeding is concluded. 
        
        

If ICANN can do this, it can make law on any other subject. I don't
think we, as registries, want to subject ourselves to mandatory
arbitration (except as provided in contracts we have signed) on any
subject that the GNSO comes up with."
 
Chuck Gomes
 
"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." 
 


________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
        Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 10:15 PM
        To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [council] IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP
        
        

        All, 

        Attached please find the IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP, which was
approved by the IPC at its meeting this morning.  Attached also for
reference is a redline against the IGO DRP that was contained in the 28
September 2007 staff report.

        The IPC believes that its proposed revised IGO DRP remedies the
aspects of the original IGO DRP that were previously identified as being
of concern.  

        The IPC proposed revised IGO DRP does not address - and was not
intended to address - the process by which an IGO DRP would become
applicable to existing gTLDs.   Once (or if) it does become applicable
to existing gTLDs, the proposed changes reflect a mechanism that is
believed to treat existing gTLD registrants fairly.

        Kristina 



        <<11282007 IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP.DOC>> <<Redline IPC
Proposed Revised IGO DRP against Original.DOC>>