RE: [council] Rec 6 motion: possible amendment

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

Mary,

The IPC can support this motion with your proposed amendment.  Without it, we 
can't.

K

________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 4:16 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Rec 6 motion: possible amendment


Hello again,

So as not to overly belabor the point or cause your Inboxes to overflow, would 
reformulating the motion along the following lines render it acceptable to 
those who were inclined to vote against it? Basically I added a Whereas clause 
and rewrote the problematic "endorsed" clause in the Resolved section:

"WHEREAS, on 8 September 2010 the GNSO Council endorsed GNSO participation in a 
joint working group with other interested Supporting Organizations (SOs) and 
Advisory Committee (ACs) to provide guidance to the ICANN new gTLD 
Implementation Team and the ICANN Board in relation to the implementation of 
the Council's Recommendation 6 regarding strings that contravene 
generally-accepted legal norms relating to morality and public order that are 
recognized under international principles of law;

WHEREAS, the Recommendation 6 cross-community working group (CWG) was 
established in accordance with the Terms of Reference also approved by the GNSO 
Council on 8 September 2010;

WHEREAS, the CWG has since delivered a set of recommendations regarding 
implementation of the GNSO Council's Recommendation 6 for new gTLDs to the 
community;

AND WHEREAS, the role of the Council is to manage the cross-community process 
on behalf of the GNSO community and the Council notes that the CWG's 
implementation proposals have been produced in accordance with the group's 
Terms of Reference;

RESOLVED, the Council thanks the CWG and its participants, from the GNSO and 
other SOs and the ACs, for their hard work; and acknowledges that the CWG 
recommendations do not constitute Consensus Policy or GNSO policy development 
otherwise within the purview of the GNSO;

RESOLVED FURTHER, the Council recommends that each Stakeholder Group provide 
feedback as soon as possible to the CWG, in order to resolve outstanding 
questions regarding implementation of Recommendation 6 in a judicious manner, 
considering in particular those recommendations that received Full Consensus in 
the CWG.

Thanks,
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<mailto: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



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<http://law.unh.edu>