All, I am not sure why we are giving this request any credibility. Sorry for my bluntness, but no one answered my questions during the GNSO session or afterwards. We seem to be conceding to ICANN that a team is necessary to revise URS policy even before seeing any of the results of the RFI which we now know there is at least one bidder that will propose doing the URS in accordance with the current policies laid out in the Guidebook for the price expected. To concede now that policy work needs to be done is conceding that the ICANN is in fact held hostage by the current vendors providing existing UDRP services. If we do indeed need to develop new policies around the URS (which at this point in time, there is no evidence that this needs to be done), I think we should address it then. But aren't we putting the cart before the horse? All of those caveats aside, if we are forced to set up a group, you can count on my participation. Thanks! Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:17 PM To: Jonathan Robinson Cc: 'Petter Rindforth'; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] URS follow-up I would like to join this, too! Thomas Am 22.10.2012 um 22:35 schrieb Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com<mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>>: Many thanks Peter. Good to have you on board for this and other items. Best wishes, Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Petter Rindforth Sent: 22 October 2012 00:38 To: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>; Jonathan Robinson Subject: Re: [council] FW: URS follow-up Dear Jonathan and All new Colleagues, Just to express my interest in participate in the further work with URS (as it seems we now have to). I have experience as an .xxx Arbitrator and also created the Swedish ADR Accelerated Proceeding, so I hope I can therewith add some ideas - and questions - in order to have a fast as possible final solution regarding the URS. Best, Petter -- Petter Rindforth, LL M Fenix Legal KB Stureplan 4c, 4tr 114 35 Stockholm Sweden Fax: +46(0)8-4631010 Direct phone: +46(0)702-369360 E-mail: petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu<mailto:petter.rindforth@fenixlegal.eu> www.fenixlegal.eu<http://www.fenixlegal.eu> NOTICE This e-mail message is intended solely for the individual or individuals to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Fenix Legal KB, Sweden, www.fenixlegal.eu<http://www.fenixlegal.eu> Thank you On 21 okt 2012 23:44 "Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com><mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com> wrote: All, Please be aware of the following note from Olof Nordling when we next consider the URS and associated issues. Jonathan From: Olof Nordling [mailto:olof.nordling@icann.org] Sent: 21 October 2012 15:33 To: jonathan.robinson@iprota.com<mailto:jonathan.robinson@iprota.com> Cc: Kurt Pritz Subject: URS follow-up Dear Jonathan, Congratulations to your recent election as GNSO Council Chair and many thanks to you and to all Council members for the constructive discussions we had on URS matters on 18 October! The willingness to consider a drafting team to address URS implementation questions and issues is much appreciated. The subsequent URS session the same day in Toronto proved most interesting. In addition to presentations from NAF and WIPO as potential URS providers, we had the advantage of a very late addition to the agenda - a presentation from a "new entrant", Intersponsive, intending to respond to the RFI with a proposal within the target fee, although with some adjustments of the URS provisions. Also NAF clarified that they would be able to stay within the target fee, provided reasonable limitations could be established to the current translation requirements and to the number of domain names covered by a single complaint. I realize that you and other Council members couldn't attend this session, as it partially overlapped with the GNSO Council session, but the recording is available at http://audio.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/urs-18oct12-en.mp3. Furthermore, there are a number of relevant documents posted on our recently established URS web page at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs, notably contributions from NAF, WIPO and CAC, with considerations, proposals, some costing aspects and, most importantly, questions needing to be resolved (the NAF contribution is of particular interest in that regard). I believe these recent developments further clarifies the need for a drafting team to establish realistic implementation measures based on the URS text. I look forward to further contacts with you and the Council on this matter in the near future. Very best regards Olof ___________________________________________________________ Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm) Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert HRB 9262, AG Bonn Büro / Office Bonn: Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0 Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.: Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56 Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66 mailto: rickert@anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de> skype-id: trickert web: www.anwaelte.de<http://www.anwaelte.de>