David is very familiar with the underlying immunity issues and
believes that the DRP approach is a way for the IGOs to avoid the
treaty route. Here are his words, "This conflict can be reconciled by
the traditional means of treaties. I understand that the impetus for
this proposal is to do an end run around the treaty process."
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:* Rosette, Kristina [mailto:krosette@xxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 29, 2007 4:55 PM
*To:* Gomes, Chuck; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* RE: [council] IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP
Chuck,
Given David's participation in the Joint Working Group on 2003,
I've assumed he's familiar with the underlying immunity issue that
motivates the arbitration proposal. (For those Councilors who may
not have the institutional knowledge of the IGO issue, it's
discussed in pages 12-14 of the Issues Report.) I, for one, would
welcome alternative suggestions from David - or anyone for that
matter - that take into account the immunity-driven limitations.
K
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 29, 2007 4:42 PM
*To:* Rosette, Kristina; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* RE: [council] IPC Proposed Revised IGO DRP
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>>