ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[dow1-2tf] Moving forward on recommendations 1 and 2

  • To: <dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [dow1-2tf] Moving forward on recommendations 1 and 2
  • From: "Steven J. Metalitz IIPA" <metalitz@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:16:26 -0500
  • Sender: owner-dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcUYMLM+agfYPfSaQ7atddBPJv+8UQ==
  • Thread-topic: Moving forward on recommendations 1 and 2

As I recall, at the end of the last meeting it was decided that the
co-chairs would circulate a proposal for an "option B" for having
further discussion on the first recommendation (notice to and consent
from registrant).  Having seen no proposal from the co-chairs I assume
we should move ahead with "regular order" (to the extent there is one!)
under the PDP, i.e., prepare the recommendation for public comment.  

Regarding the second recommendation (procedure for situations of alleged
conflict between ICANN agreements and local law re Whois), we have been
discussing two options:  moving ahead under the PDP (seeking
constituency statements on the recommendation), or continuing to wait
until it becomes possible to schedule a meeting with the ICANN staff
that have apparently expressed objections to the recommendation.  A
third option has been brought to my attention, and I believe it is worth
serious consideration:  asking the ICANN Ombudsman to intervene.  Our
problem clearly seems to fall within the ombudsman's purview.  See
Ombudsman Framework, at
http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/ombudsman-framework-03dec04.htm ("The
Ombudsman's function is to act as an Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) office for the ICANN community who may wish to lodge a complaint
about a staff or board decision, action or inaction. The purpose of the
office is to ensure that the members of the ICANN community have been
treated fairly. The Ombudsman will act as an impartial officer and will
attempt to resolve complaints about unfair treatment by ICANN using ADR
techniques.").  The ombudsman's webpage states: "The ICANN Ombudsman
will receive and have jurisdiction over complaints concerning:
Decisions, actions, or inactions by one or more members of ICANN staff".
I believe that is the situation we face here.  

While the ombudsman process can be invoked by anyone, and it would not
require a decision of the Task Force for one or more individuals to move
forward on this route, I believe it is worth discussing this option on
our call tomorrow.    

Steve Metalitz

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>