December 2009 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] Voting for At-Large Director
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 6, 2009

Dec. 6, 2009

It was announced on the ALAC-Announce list on Dec 2. I will forward it to this list. Although I don't know why, Hong is not on that list. People can self-subscribe and visit the list archives at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge-lists…. Alan At 06/12/2009 03:38 AM, Hong Xue wrote: >Thanks, Alan, for forwarding the call information to the list. I wonder why >the community call was not announced by the Staff. I can only find the >following one in October as the latest.

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Urgent: OECD Conference on E-Consumers in Washington DC: deadline for application today 4 Dec 09
by Beau Brendler Dec. 5, 2009

Dec. 5, 2009

I registered. Whether I will be "approved" and able to make it or not, I don't know, but I will try. Beau Brendler -----Original Message----- >From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> >Sent: Dec 4, 2009 5:49 PM >To: At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >Subject: [At-Large] Urgent: OECD Conference on E-Consumers in Washington DC: deadline for application today 4 Dec 09 > >Apologies for this, but I only got told about this today. >I am sending this in a hurry because I see that there are still a few hours >for people to register before the deadline: > >OECD conference: >Empowering E-Consumers: >Strengthening Consumer Protection in the Internet Economy > >Washington, DC, 8-10 December 2009 > >The OECD Conference on E-Consumers will take place on 8-10 December 2009. It >will be held at the US Federal Trade Commission's Conference Centre, located >at 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001 > >Conference home page on: >http://www.oecd.org/site/0,3407,en_21571361_43348316_1_1_1_1_1,00.html > >Register on: >http://webnet.oecd.org/survey/Survey.aspx?surveyid=3754 > >I hope that someone from local ALSs can make it there, and make the voice of >the Internet users heard. > >Warm regards, > >Olivier > >-- >Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD >http://www.gih.com/ocl.html > > >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Urgent: OECD Conference on E-Consumers in Washington DC: deadline for application today 4 Dec 09
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

Apologies for this, but I only got told about this today. I am sending this in a hurry because I see that there are still a few hours for people to register before the deadline: OECD conference: Empowering E-Consumers: Strengthening Consumer Protection in the Internet Economy Washington, DC, 8-10 December 2009 The OECD Conference on E-Consumers will take place on 8-10 December 2009. It will be held at the US Federal Trade Commission's Conference Centre, located at 601 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001 Conference home page on: http://www.oecd.org/site/0,3407,en_21571361_43348316_1_1_1_1_1,00.html Register on: http://webnet.oecd.org/survey/Survey.aspx?surveyid=3754 I hope that someone from local ALSs can make it there, and make the voice of the Internet users heard. Warm regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Dec. 4, 2009

Dec. 4, 2009

Total of 12 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Dec 4 00:53:07 EST 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 33.33% | 4 | 46.06% | 79154 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 41.67% | 5 | 36.44% | 62630 | hongxueipr at gmail.com 16.67% | 2 | 14.38% | 24714 | vanda at uol.com.br 8.33% | 1 | 3.12% | 5365 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 12 |100.00% | 171863 | Total

1 0

moderated messages
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 2, 2009

Dec. 2, 2009

And could someone please release the two messages that are being held hostage due to too many recipients. Time is very short on this issue. Alan At 01/12/2009 02:23 AM, Hong Xue wrote: >Nick, could you take a look at the "Name-Issues list"? For the reason >unknown, I'm being filtered and can neither receive nor send messages to >that list. > >Thanks, Alan, for sending me the list archives, which enable me to catch up >the discussions on the Name-Issues list. > >Hong > > > > > > >On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Alan Greenberg ><alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca>wrote: > > > I presume that Adam is Alan, since I haven't seen any traffic from Adam. > > > > The original message was sent to: > > > > - the Names-Issues list (archived at > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/name-issues_atlarge-lists.icann.or…) > > There have been messages on this topic on that list. It is not practical to > > forward them, but anyone is free to look at them and then comment > here. Hong > > is part of that group and on the list. > > > > - the public ALAC list (archived at > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2009/…) > > There has been no traffic there on this topic. > > > > - the At-Large list (this one - archived at > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2…) > > > > > > The message was not sent to the ALAC-Internal list and there has been no > > traffic there. > > > > I was requested by the ALAC to send to all three lists. Some RALOs may also > > have forwarded to their own discuss lists. If so, I am not aware of any > > traffic there. > > > > Alan > > > > > > > > At 30/11/2009 08:01 PM, Hong Xue wrote: > > > >> Thanks, Vanda. > >> > >> It seems that we are discussing the same issue on the different lists. I > >> guess Adam or Oliver must be talking about this on the ALAC internal list, > >> which cannot be viewed by the large community. Could someone forward the > >> internal one to this public list? We have very limited time and may wish > >> to > >> converge the discussions for more fruitful outcome. > >> > >> Hong > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > > >-- >Dr. Hong Xue >Professor of Law >Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) >Beijing Normal University >www.iipl.org.cn >19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street >Beijing 100875 China >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Fwd: [eoi-wg] Final report and charter
by Patrick Vande Walle Dec. 1, 2009

Dec. 1, 2009

Please find attached the final report of the EoI working group. Patrick -------- Original Message -------- [eoi-wg] Final report and charter Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:28:23 -0500 Antony Van Couvering Expression of Interest Working group Expression of Interest Working group Hi everyone, At about the same time you receive this, I will have posted to the EOI comment area our final report and charter. As I noted before, I've tried to capture input from all of our members, as well as from those who participated on our list or on our calls. If I have mischaracterized anyone's input, or left something out, I urge you to make corrections and emendations in the ICANN comment area at http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#eoi-new-gtlds [1] or by just sending an email to eoi-new-gtlds(a)icann.org [2]. I further urge each and every member to submit separate comments to ICANN. I would like to thank everyone for making time to help out, and I'd like to thank especially Patrick Vande Walle for providing a mail list for our use. Archives may be found at http://lists.pra.im/pipermail/eoi-wg/ [3] I would like to ask Patrick to close the mailing list now --- and with that, our work is done. Best regards, Antony Links: ------ [1] http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#eoi-new-gtlds [2] mailto:eoi-new-gtlds@icann.org [3] http://lists.pra.im/pipermail/eoi-wg/

2 1

Re: [At-Large] Fwd: Status update on GNSI STI Progress - including draft proposals
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 1, 2009

Dec. 1, 2009

I presume that Adam is Alan, since I haven't seen any traffic from Adam. The original message was sent to: - the Names-Issues list (archived at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/name-issues_atlarge-lists.icann.or…) There have been messages on this topic on that list. It is not practical to forward them, but anyone is free to look at them and then comment here. Hong is part of that group and on the list. - the public ALAC list (archived at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2009/…) There has been no traffic there on this topic. - the At-Large list (this one - archived at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2…) The message was not sent to the ALAC-Internal list and there has been no traffic there. I was requested by the ALAC to send to all three lists. Some RALOs may also have forwarded to their own discuss lists. If so, I am not aware of any traffic there. Alan At 30/11/2009 08:01 PM, Hong Xue wrote: >Thanks, Vanda. > >It seems that we are discussing the same issue on the different lists. I >guess Adam or Oliver must be talking about this on the ALAC internal list, >which cannot be viewed by the large community. Could someone forward the >internal one to this public list? We have very limited time and may wish to >converge the discussions for more fruitful outcome. > >Hong

2 1

Fwd: Status update on GNSI STI Progress - including draft proposals
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 1, 2009

Dec. 1, 2009

Following is a message just sent to the Names Issues Working Group. It was also be sent to the ALAC list. Input and comments welcome from all, but please note the tight timeline. Alan >To: name-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >Subject: Status update on GNSI STI Progress - including draft proposals > >I am attaching the current working "strawman" proposals for a >Trademark Clearinghouse and a Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) service >associated with new gTLDs. PLEASE NOTE LAST PARAGRAPH. > >For completeness I am including pointers to previous documents, all >of which have substantially influenced what you see today and a >description of the process which has been followed. > >In June 2009, the final report of the IRT on trademark protection >measures was issued. It can be found at >http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200906.html#irt-report. >Among the measures contained in the report were a Intellectual >Property Clearinghouse to facilitate pre-launch handling of >trademarks issues, and a URS process to address such issues after launch. > >Based on a variety of consultations, ICANN staff were requested to >formulate revised Clearinghouse and URS proposals. The specific >proposals can be found at >http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-proposed-procedure-tm-cleari… >and >http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-proposed-procedure-urs-04oct…. >Additional material including a comparison of these proposals and >those in the IRT Report can be found at >http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/gnso-consultations-reports-en.htm. > >Following initial comments on the staff proposals, the ICANN Board >requested that the GNSO review these proposals and (optimally) >present a consensus view of how ICANN should proceed. In the absence >of such consensus, staff and the Board would come to its own >decision of how to proceed (factoring in any input received >including non-consensus views from the GNSO). The letter requesting >this input can be found at >http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/beckstrom-to-gnso-council-12oct09-en.p…. > >The GNSO was given until 14 December 2009 to deliberate and deliver >a report (2 months from receipt of the letter). During the Seoul >ICANN meeting, a group was created to take on this task - the >Selected Trademark Issues Review Team (STI-RT). The group includes >two representatives from each of the Registry and Registrar >Stakeholder Groups, four from each of the Commercial and >Non-commercial Stakeholder Groups, one GNSO NomCom appointee, and >one representative from At-Large. Several of these groups have >Alternates who can participate in the absence of one of the prime >delegates. I (Alan Greenberg) am the formal At-Large representative, >and Olivier Crepin-Leblond is the Alternate. > >It is important to remember that the question being asked is not >whether a Clearinghouse or URS should be implemented, but rather how >to best do it in light of conflicting needs of the various parties. > >The STI-RT was asked to report back to the GNSO Council in time for >its 23 November meeting. This target was viewed by some as being >unreasonably tight, which proved to be correct. > >To date, the STI-RT has met 9 times, once in Seoul, and two >teleconferences in each week since Seoul (1 on the Clearinghouse, >and 1 on the URS per week). In total, there have been about 14 hours >of formal meetings and many informal and sub-group meetings. At this >point, we have consensus on many but not all of the issues. To reach >consensus, for each of the two themes, a number of critical issues >and processes were identified. A "strawman" proposal was drafted for >each (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_proposal) and for >the last two weeks, the STI-RT has been reviewing and adjusting this >proposal, with the intent of finding some middle ground which meets >the overall needs of all of the parties. > >The current plan is to keep refining these proposals over the next >week (4 teleconferences are scheduled) and to deliver a final >proposal to the GNSO on 07 December 2009. There is some chance that >this target may slip by a couple of days. This will give the GNSO >Constituencies and At-Large a week (or perhaps a few days more) to >review the proposal and to decide whether to ratify it during the >GNSO Council meeting on 17 December 2009. The GNSO has been told >that this slippage of three days from the original requested target >is acceptable. > >There is a possibility that if full consensus is not reached, but is >felt that it is possible given more time, the report will be >submitted on the above schedule, but a face-to-face meeting in early >January may be scheduled to finalize it. > >Current versions of the two strawman proposals are attached. They >may be a bit cryptic, but reference to the documents mentioned above >will explain much of this. > >Since the ALAC, just as the GNSO Constituencies, will have just one >week to support or not support the report to be issued on 07 >December, these draft copies should be used to begin the evaluation >on those items where consensus has been reached, and to provide any >comments or advice on those items where common ground has not yet been reached. > >Alan >

3 5