Re: [council] Request for extension of time for IGO-INGO Issue Report on Curative Rights Protection
And I should perhaps have clarified that I was looking for any problems or questions to surface rapidly, if possible, given that we are at the 45 day mark, so my apologies if my choice of phrasing was awkward. Klaus, in answer to your question, I can only say that we are trying our best to complete the report as soon as we can. Since there's quite a bit of coordination required amongst various departments whose work may be impacted by the issues, I am afraid I cannot at this point promise a date certain. However, I am fairly confident that we will have the report done and published for the requisite 30-day public comment period by the end of this month. Following that, staff will prepare a Final Issue Report (based on and incorporating feedback received) that we will forward to the Council for your review and discussion. As currently anticipated, this may be at the ICANN meeting in Singapore in late March. (If it would be helpful, I should also point out that even under the original 45 day period specified in the PDP Manual, it would still be unlikely that the Final Issue Report will be presented to the Council before the Singapore meeting anyway.) I hope this helps, and thank you all for your understanding. Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx * One World. One Internet. * -----Original Message----- From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 10:56 AM To: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [council] Request for extension of time for IGO-INGO Issue Report on Curative Rights Protection >Hi Avri, > >The PDP Manual states that 'In the event the Staff Manager determines that >more time is necessary to create the Preliminary Issue Report, the Staff >Manager may request an extension of time for completion of the Preliminary >Issue Report, which request should be discussed with the Requestor'. It >does not specify how this discussion should take place or whether there is >a set timeframe for it. > >Best regards, > >Marika > >On 07/01/14 16:49, "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>(dropped the Cc:s) >> >>Hi, >> >>no objection to record on my part either. >> >>But a council-newbie question about working practice: In the council, >>when someone, chair or whomever, says 'if there is no objection' does >>that mean we all have to let the list know that we have no objection? >>Or may we passively say nothing if we have no objection? >> >>Is there a time limit on such no-objection 'calls'? >> >>Thanks >> >>avri >> >> >>On 07-Jan-14 09:23, Reed, Daniel A wrote: >>> Fine with me. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> *From:*owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Amr Elsadr >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 07, 2014 5:28 AM >>> *To:* Thomas Rickert >>> *Cc:* Winterfeldt, Brian J.; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> *Subject:* Re: [council] Request for extension of time for IGO-INGO >>> Issue Report on Curative Rights Protection >>> >>> No objections on my part either. Good luck to the staff members working >>> on putting the report together. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Amr >>> >>> On Jan 7, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx >>> <mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary and Brian, >>> >>> I have no objection either. >>> >>> Thomas >>> >>> Am 07.01.2014 um 05:02 schrieb "Winterfeldt, Brian J." >>> <brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>><mailto:brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>: >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Mary: >>> >>> Thank you for the heads up. The IPC has no objection to this >>>extension. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> *Brian J. Winterfeldt >>> *Head of Internet Practice >>> *Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP >>> *2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118 >>> p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244 >>> brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> <mailto:brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>/www.kattenlaw.com >>> <http://www.kattenlaw.com/> >>> >>> *From:*Mary Wong <mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx>> >>> *Date:*January 6, 2014 at 11:15:20 AM EST >>> *To:*"council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" >>> <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >>> *Subject:**[council] Request for extension of time for IGO-INGO >>> Issue Report on Curative Rights Protection* >>> >>> Dear Councilors, >>> >>> We trust that you enjoyed a merry and festive holiday break, and >>> extend a warm welcome back to you for the Council activities for >>>2014! >>> >>> As you will recall, the Council approved all the consensus >>> recommendations made by the IGO-INGO PDP Working Group at the >>> Council meeting in Buenos Aires on 20 November 2013. One of these >>> recommendations was for an Issue Report relating to possible >>> modifications to the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and >>> the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) process in order to enable >>> protected IGOs and INGOs to access and utilize these curative >>>rights >>> protection mechanisms. >>> >>> Staff has been engaged in preparing the Preliminary Issue Report, >>>as >>> requested; however, due to the holiday break and the need for >>> internal coordination of several questions posed by the issue under >>> consideration, we find that we cannot complete the full report >>> within the 45 calendar day requirement specified in the GNSO PDP >>> Manual. As a result, I hereby write to request an extension of the >>> time period. My expectation is that staff will be able to complete >>> and publish the full Preliminary Issue Report before the end of >>> January 2014 for public comment, following which a Final Issue >>> Report will be prepared and submitted to the GNSO Council for your >>> review and action. >>> >>> Please let me know if there are any objections to the requested >>> extension. Thank you. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Mary >>> >>> Mary Wong >>> >>> Senior Policy Director >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 >>> >>> Email:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> * One World. One Internet. * >>> >>> =========================================================== >>> >>> CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice >>>Before the Internal Revenue >>> >>> Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to >>>be used and cannot be used >>> >>> by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be >>>imposed on the taxpayer. >>> >>> =========================================================== >>> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: >>> >>> This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information >>>intended for the exclusive >>> >>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain >>>information that is >>> >>> proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure >>>under applicable law. If you >>> >>> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >>>viewing, copying, disclosure or >>> >>> distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or >>>sanction. Please notify >>> >>> the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended >>>recipients and delete the original >>> >>> message without making any copies. >>> >>> =========================================================== >>> >>> NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited >>>liability partnership that has >>> >>> elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997). >>> >>> =========================================================== >>> Attachment:
smime.p7s
|