FW: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers
Dear BC members The following communication has been transmitted to ICANN Board Chair; CEO/President Fadi Chehade, with copy to John Jeffrey, General Counsel and Board Secretary to convey the position that the BC developed regarding concerns about approval of UDRP providers. During the BC's list discussion over the last few days regarding this topic, some members raised other considerations that they wish to discuss, such how to ensure that providers are available from the developing countries that can effectively serve the new gTLDs, especially IDNs and those who may have significant numbers of new registrants from such regions as Africa, Latin America, Arab States. Steve Delbianco, V.Chair, Policy Coordination has provided information about how such topics might be addressed, and changes to any BC position be undertaken. Stay tuned for whether BC members do propose changes or updates to an existing BC statement, such as this. In addition, one BC member, Phil Corwin also shared a letter from the association he represents, sent in individual capacity to the Board, and which also references the BC position of October 2010. If other BC members do also write in your individual capacity, please also share an informational copy with the BC list. Marilyn CadeBC ChairFrom: marilynscade@hotmail.com To: steve.crocker@icann.org; fadi.chehade@icann.org; john.jeffrey@icann.org CC: excomm@bizconst.org Subject: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:57:57 -0500 Dear Chairman Crocker and President/CEO Chehade Comment from BC on recognizing new UDRP providers It has come to our attention that the Board Consent agenda includes consideration of a proposal for a new UDRP provider. This was a surprise to many, as there had been no intervening communications with the broader community since 2010. There is therefore a lack of information regarding the proposal and how earlier concerns have been addressed by ICANN. I am retransmitting the position of the BC regarding recognizing new UDRP providers, which was developed and posted in October 2010, in response to an ICANN proposal to recognize new domain name dispute providers. As described in the Statement, the BC believes that ICANN should implement a standard mechanism for establishing uniform rules and procedures and flexible means of delineating and enforcing arbitration provider responsibilities. Transmitted by the BC Chair, on behalf of the Business ConstituencyFebruary 27, 2013
Marilyn and fellow BC members: Thank you very much for communicating with the Board on this matter, the pending proposal of the ACDR to be a UDRP provider. I appreciate the cooperation of BC leadership and fellow BC members in facilitating the restatement of an in force and specifically relevant BC position, and to expediting its transmittal so that the Board could be informed in a timely fashion. Again, in my view, the procedural problem with the proposal appearing on the Board consent agenda is that, 2.5 years after the original proposal had been put out for comment, and after it had received numerous statements of opposition and requests for clarification and improvement, it is poised for final Board action absent any public notice of whether and to what extent the original proposal had been modified to address the concerns that had been voiced in 2010. This is not consistent with the core ICANN principles of transparency and accountability. As to moving ahead on relevant substantive policy, there should be no irreconcilable conflict between the desire "to ensure that providers are available from the developing countries that can effectively serve the new gTLDs, especially IDNs and those who may have significant numbers of new registrants from such regions as Africa, Latin America, Arab States" and assuring that the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy for the global DNS is administered in a uniform manner by all accredited providers no matter where they are located - both complainants and registrants deserve no less. I look forward to any further discussion of this matter. Best regards, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 5:06 PM To: bc - GNSO list Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers Dear BC members The following communication has been transmitted to ICANN Board Chair; CEO/President Fadi Chehade, with copy to John Jeffrey, General Counsel and Board Secretary to convey the position that the BC developed regarding concerns about approval of UDRP providers. During the BC's list discussion over the last few days regarding this topic, some members raised other considerations that they wish to discuss, such how to ensure that providers are available from the developing countries that can effectively serve the new gTLDs, especially IDNs and those who may have significant numbers of new registrants from such regions as Africa, Latin America, Arab States. Steve Delbianco, V.Chair, Policy Coordination has provided information about how such topics might be addressed, and changes to any BC position be undertaken. Stay tuned for whether BC members do propose changes or updates to an existing BC statement, such as this. In addition, one BC member, Phil Corwin also shared a letter from the association he represents, sent in individual capacity to the Board, and which also references the BC position of October 2010. If other BC members do also write in your individual capacity, please also share an informational copy with the BC list. Marilyn Cade BC Chair ________________________________ From: marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com> To: steve.crocker@icann.org<mailto:steve.crocker@icann.org>; fadi.chehade@icann.org<mailto:fadi.chehade@icann.org>; john.jeffrey@icann.org<mailto:john.jeffrey@icann.org> CC: excomm@bizconst.org<mailto:excomm@bizconst.org> Subject: Communication from Business Constituency regarding position of Constituency on approval of UDRP providers Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:57:57 -0500 Dear Chairman Crocker and President/CEO Chehade Comment from BC on recognizing new UDRP providers It has come to our attention that the Board Consent agenda includes consideration of a proposal for a new UDRP provider. This was a surprise to many, as there had been no intervening communications with the broader community since 2010. There is therefore a lack of information regarding the proposal and how earlier concerns have been addressed by ICANN. I am retransmitting the position of the BC regarding recognizing new UDRP providers, which was developed and posted in October 2010, in response to an ICANN proposal to recognize new domain name dispute providers. As described in the Statement, the BC believes that ICANN should implement a standard mechanism for establishing uniform rules and procedures and flexible means of delineating and enforcing arbitration provider responsibilities. Transmitted by the BC Chair, on behalf of the Business Constituency February 27, 2013 ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2641/6130 - Release Date: 02/25/13
participants (2)
-
Marilyn Cade -
Phil Corwin