Re: [council] IGO INGO Final Issue Report & Motion for Council

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Does the Charter exist as a separate document, or is it only to be found
as an annex to the final issues report?

Also has there been any in depth discussion in the council of the
charter yet.  I don't recall it.

As you recall NCSG has varied concerns, often expressed, about the scope
of addition of special protections beyond those that have been already
been granted.  This concern translates into concern over the mandate in
the charter to deal with anything that had been discussed during the
IGO/INGO WG.  A lot was discussed. I am also not clear on the scope of
identifiers that can be considered.  Obviously it goes beyond those
already defined as excluded for second level, but I do not understand
the permissible scope for this PDP, and I have spent a far bit of time
bouncing around between the Final Report and the Final Issues report
trying to figure that out.  For example I wasn't able to answer the
simple question: Are acronyms in scope for considerations?  I am sure I
am missed it, but I missed it.

So as we approach the vote I have to admit that I do not understand the
scope, and this came full face the other day when I tried to explain it
to an NCSG open policy meeting.  I thus also do not have a good view of
the NSCG viewpoints on this except to understand that they run the
entire gambit.  I  need to understand the scope better and may not be
ready to vote at this point.

I should note that while I am personally inclined to support opening the
UDRP and URS beyond business marks to support intergovernmental and
civil society needs, some of the NCSG is much less inclined to do so.
This makes it critical to understand the full scope.

Apologies if it is crystal clear to everyone else and I am just missing
it.  Thomas, I expect it is all crystal clear to you, so I would
appreciate some help in understanding the scope.

Thanks

avri

On 05-Jun-14 11:35, Thomas Rickert wrote:
> All,
> Jonathan has kindly proposed the two motions we will discuss later
> today. I herewith second the motions. 
> 
> As you will recall, I have chaired the IGO/INGO PDP WG and would very
> much like to encourage Councillors to submit questions there might be
> relating to the motions to the Council list. This will enable me and
> staff to have all information you might be asking ready prior or in the
> call. 
> 
> Please note that the motions are a follow-up to the recommendation we
> unanimously approved previously and in which we recommended this very
> PDP should be conducted.
> 
> Thanks and kind regards,
> Thomas
> 
> 
> Am 27.05.2014 um 00:54 schrieb Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> 
>> All,
>>
>>  
>>
>> Please see attached for two proposed motions for the next council meeting.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Ordinarily, I expect that these would have come to you from Thomas
>> Rickert as chair of the PDP WG that developed the recommendation for
>> the Issue Report.
>>
>>  
>>
>> However, since Thomas is currently on vacation, I have decided to
>> propose the motions.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>  
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> <Motion to Initiate Curative Rights PDP - 23 May 2014.docx><Motion for
>> IGO INGO Curative Rights Charter Adoption - 25 May 2014.doc>
>