<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
AW: [ispcp] RE: IRT statement
- To: <tonyarholmes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <maggie.mansourkia@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <ispcp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: AW: [ispcp] RE: IRT statement
- From: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:13:19 +0100
- In-reply-to: <006a01ca5833$020922d0$061b6870$@com>
- List-id: ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <16AB7D0EB93D8840A2367AD258D1543901D9B40B@FLDP1LUMXCV31.us.one.verizon.com> <006a01ca5833$020922d0$061b6870$@com>
- Sender: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcpXn/n/D5Eq7nNIQRa3DDd/yb9lQwAkkHzAAAK2VlA=
- Thread-topic: [ispcp] RE: IRT statement
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
Deutsche Telekom AG
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 3-7
D - 64295 Darmstadt
+49 2244 873999 (Tel.)
+49 2151 5300 5206 (PC-Fax)
+49 151 1452 5867 (Mobil)
http://www.telekom.com <http://www.telekom.com/>
Deutsche Telekom AG
Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender)
Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender)
Timotheus Höttges (stellvertretender Vorsitzender)
Hamid Akhavan, Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Guido Kerkhoff, Thomas Sattelberger
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn
WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE50478376
Maggie,
I didn't receive the draft. Could you please forward it to this E-Mail address?
Thanks
_____
Von: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Tony Holmes
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2009 01:59
An: 'Mansourkia, Magnolia'; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [ispcp] RE: IRT statement
Maggie (and drafting team)
Many thanks for producing this and meeting the time constraints.
I'm fine with the content, its brief and covers what's required as the initial ISPCP input.
Tony
From: Mansourkia, Magnolia [mailto:maggie.mansourkia@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 28 October 2009 07:27
To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx; Tony Holmes
Subject: IRT statement
Importance: High
Hi all. These are the proposed bullet points that Tony will use as the basis of our constituency statement for the IRT working group. Please review and provide your comments to the list. Obviously, we did not address every question in the letter, only those that we had a vested interest in.
* There is no need for the clearinghouse to be separate and independent from ICANN. ICANN should oversee and have complete responsibility for the clearinghouse.
* URS must be mandatory. Staff's belief that there is a strong incentive to do this anyway does not address the impact of a business model formed as a haven for bad actors.
* The clearinghouse is an existing and proven model that preserves rights while expediting the registrants ability to register domains that do not infringe on the rights of others. It is a model that should extend to existing registries, but consideration should be given to the timing.
Please copy the list on your response, if any. Tony will need our responses by end of day, Thursday, October 29th.
Thanks,
M.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|