RE: [council] GAC UDRP position

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Read as - the GAC and IP lobby are very closely aligned.

:)

No news there...

Adrian Kinderis



From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Saturday, 24 September 2011 11:48 PM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] GAC UDRP position

Councillors,

Please find below a message Heather sent me. I asked if I could share it with 
the Council and she responded that was fine.

Thanks,

Stéphane



Début du message réexpédié :


De : <Heather.Dryden@xxxxxxxx<mailto:Heather.Dryden@xxxxxxxx>>
Objet : GNSO call/UDRP
Date : 22 septembre 2011 04:03:05 HAEC
À : <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>>

Dear Stephane

One of my GAC members has alerted me to the blog post cited below, asserting 
that the GAC position on the UDRP review was somehow drafted by the law firm, 
Covington and Burling.  In the event this issue might be raised during your 
Council call on September 22, I felt it important to assure you that the GAC 
position was in fact drafted by a small group of GAC members, circulated to the 
entire GAC list, and edited by a number of GAC members before being finalized.  
It is my understanding that one of the GAC members involved in the initial 
drafting exercise did consult with domestic stakeholders and accepted a 
proposed edit from a lawyer with Covington and Burling to insert a direct 
reference to the Board's rationale for approving the new gTLD program, with a 
cite to that report.  For reasons I do not understand, the tag to the firm 
remained in subsequent versions of the draft and now appears in the final 
version as well.  That should not be understood by the GNSO Council to suggest 
that the firm drafted the GAC text.  Thank you for your attention to this 
matter.

Best regards,
Heather