For the record, I agree with both of Robin’s points, and
am copying Council list so the Councilors can see a couple big issues that will
be inherent in every F2F meeting that is sought by any WG.
I continue to disagree that Staff should assist with a F2F
meeting of this PDP-WT, without GNSO Council consideration and approval of such
a request, in light of all other GNSO priorities and initiatives that are
ongoing. I must assume that budget for this sort of thing is not
unlimited, and so should not simply be usurped because a few people think that
this is a priority over all else, and have got themselves ‘first in line’.
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
From:
owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org] On
Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 9:57 PM
To: Robin Gross; Marika Konings
Cc: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org
Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Draft request for a PDP-WT face-to-face
meeting
Thank you for this note Robin. We will discuss during the
call on Thursday. Please rest assured that regardless of the outcome of the
issue of 1 vs 2 or 3 reps, it is my job to ensure that all viewpoints are heard
and reflected in any resulting work product. This should have nothing to
do with the number of people from a particular group that attend a meeting.
If I am not successful in doing my job, I expect you all to let me
know.
Thanks.
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
The
information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of
the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in
error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately and delete the original message.
From:
owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org] On
Behalf Of Robin Gross
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:24 PM
To: Marika Konings
Cc: Gnso-ppsc-pdp@icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Draft request for a PDP-WT face-to-face
meeting
Thanks for the draft. I have a couple concerns with
it, however, before it can meet approval.
I disagree with the proposition that only 1 NCSG member will
be funded to participate, while 3 CSG representatives will be funded to
participate at this meeting. Given the move toward parity within the
GNSO, NCSG should have equal participation to CSG at this meeting. It
seems hardly fair for Internet users (via ICANN) to fund 3 commercial participants
while the non-commercial users are only allowed 1 representative. NCSG
would settle for 2 members to participate, however (still less than CSG's 3).
I also disagree with the proposition that our participants
have to meet ICANN's "active participation" standard. At least
within NCSG, we cannot send our member who has been most active and need to
send another person in many cases. NCSG members coordinate among
themselves on a position and who to send to represent us. It may not
always be someone who ICANN decides is "active" enough. But it
is ultimately up to the NCSG (not ICANN) as to who to send to
represent noncommercial users at the meeting.
Thanks,
Robin
On Dec 2, 2009, at 1:36 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear
All,
As discussed, please find attached the draft request for a PDP-WT face-to-face
meeting for discussion and review at our next meeting, Thursday 3 December at
15.00 UTC.
With best regards,
Marika <Request for a PDP WT Face to Face meeting - 2 December 2009.doc>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451