Re: RE: [council] URS follow-up

["Petter Rindforth" <petter.rindforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
 
I was also of the initial impression at the ICANN meeting that this was
not a hurry subject, however if (and it seems that) this issue is open
up again, we must be ready to solve it quickly with a group that is
ready to step in and finalize the URS.
 
So, again, I am ready to work on this - if needed.
/ Petter
-- 
Petter Rindforth, LL M
Fenix Legal KB
Stureplan 4c, 4tr
114 35 Stockholm
Sweden
Fax: +46(0)8-4631010
Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360
E-mail: <petter.rindforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
NOTICE
This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals
to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client
privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read,
copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please
delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail.
Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, <http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
Thank you
On 25 okt 2012 22:26 "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jeff, you are correct. But I think what we sort of agreed to was to
> have a group ready if it is needed.
> At the very least, the kind of suggestions that NAF has made related
> to the number of requests in a single URS seems reasonable (although I
> admit that my presumption was that the limit was already 1).
> But as you, I worked hard on the STI and will do so again if more work
> is needed.
> Alan
> At 25/10/2012 04:11 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> > All,
> >  
> > I am not sure why we are giving this request any credibility.  Sorry
> > for my bluntness, but no one answered my questions during the GNSO
> > session or afterwards.  We seem to be conceding to ICANN that a team
> > is necessary to revise URS policy even before seeing any of the
> > results of the RFI which we now know there is at least one bidder
> > that will propose doing the URS in accordance with the current
> > policies laid out in the Guidebook for the price expected.
> >  
> > To concede now that policy work needs to be done is conceding that
> > the ICANN is in fact held hostage by the current vendors providing
> > existing UDRP services.  If we do indeed need to develop new
> > policies around the URS (which at this point in time, there is no
> > evidence that this needs to be done), I think we should address it
> > then.  But aren?t we putting the cart before the horse?
> >  
> > All of those caveats aside, if we are forced to set up a group, you
> > can count on my participation.
> > Thanks!
> >  
> > Jeffrey J. Neuman
> > Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
> >  
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
> > On Behalf OfThomas Rickert
> > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:17 PM
> > To: Jonathan Robinson
> > Cc: 'Petter Rindforth'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [council] URS follow-up
> >  
> > I would like to  join this, too!
> >  
> > Thomas
> >  
> >  
> > Am 22.10.2012 um 22:35 schrieb Jonathan Robinson
> > <<jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> > Many thanks Peter.
> >  
> > Good to have you on board for this and other items.
> >  
> > Best wishes,
> >  
> >  
> > Jonathan
> >  
> > From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
> > On Behalf OfPetter Rindforth
> > Sent: 22 October 2012 00:38
> > To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Robinson
> > Subject: Re: [council] FW: URS follow-up
> >  
> > Dear Jonathan and All new Colleagues,
> >  
> > Just to express my interest in participate in the further work with
> > URS (as it seems we now have to).
> >  
> > I have experience as an .xxx Arbitrator and also created the Swedish
> > ADR Accelerated Proceeding, so I hope I can therewith add some
> > ideas  - and questions  - in order to have a fast as possible final
> > solution regarding the URS.
> >  
> > Best,
> > Petter
> >  
> > -- 
> > Petter Rindforth, LL M
> >  
> > Fenix Legal KB
> > Stureplan 4c, 4tr
> > 114 35 Stockholm
> > Sweden
> > Fax: +46(0)8-4631010
> > Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360
> > E-mail:
> > petter.rindforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <petter.rindforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > www.fenixlegal.eu <http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
> >  
> >  
> > NOTICE
> > This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or
> > individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential
> > attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If
> > the
> > reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> > requested
> > not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it
> > contains.
> > Please delete it immediately and notify us by return
> > e-mail.
> > Fenix Legal KB, Sweden,
> > <http://www.fenixlegal.eu/>
> > Thank you
> > On 21 okt 2012 23:44 "Jonathan Robinson"
> > <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > All,   Please be aware of the following note from Olof Nordling when
> > we next consider the URS and associated issues.   Jonathan   From:
> > Olof Nordling [mailto:olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx
> > <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>] Sent: 21 October 2012 15:33 To:
> > <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Kurt Pritz Subject: URS follow-up
> >  Dear Jonathan, Congratulations to your recent election as GNSO
> > Council Chair and many thanks to you and to all Council members for
> > the constructive discussions we had on URS matters on 18 October!
> > The willingness to consider a drafting team to address URS
> > implementation questions and issues is much appreciated.   The
> > subsequent URS session the same day in Toronto proved most
> > interesting. In addition to presentations from NAF and WIPO as 
> > potential URS providers, we had the advantage of a very late
> > addition to the agenda ? a presentation from a ?new entrant?,
> > Intersponsive, intending to respond to the RFI with a proposal
> > within the target fee, although with some adjustments of the URS
> > provisions. Also NAF clarified that they would be able to stay
> > within the target fee, provided reasonable limitations could be
> > established to the current translation requirements and to the
> > number of domain names covered by a single complaint.   I realize
> > that you and other Council members couldn?t attend this session, as
> > it partially overlapped with the GNSO Council session, but the
> > recording is available at
> > <http://audio.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/urs-18oct12-en.mp3>.
> > Furthermore, there are a number of relevant documents posted on our
> > recently established URS web page at
> > <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs>, notably contributions
> > from NAF, WIPO and CAC, with considerations, proposals, some costing
> > aspects and, most importantly, questions needing to be resolved (the
> > NAF contribution is of particular interest in that regard).   I
> > believe these recent developments further clarifies the need for a
> > drafting team to establish realistic implementation measures based
> > on the URS text. I look forward to further contacts with you and the
> > Council on this matter in the near future.   Very best regards Olof 
> >   
> > ___________________________________________________________
> > Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt
> > Schollmeyer &  Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law
> > firm)
> > Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert
> > HRB 9262, AG Bonn
> > Büro / Office Bonn:
> > Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany
> > Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0
> > Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.:
> > Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany
> > Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56
> > Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66
> > mailto: rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:%A0rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > skype-id: trickert
> > web: <http://www.anwaelte.de/>
> >