Read as - the GAC and IP lobby are very closely aligned. :) No news there... Adrian Kinderis From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: Saturday, 24 September 2011 11:48 PM To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] GAC UDRP position Councillors, Please find below a message Heather sent me. I asked if I could share it with the Council and she responded that was fine. Thanks, Stéphane Début du message réexpédié : De : <Heather.Dryden@ic.gc.ca<mailto:Heather.Dryden@ic.gc.ca>> Objet : GNSO call/UDRP Date : 22 septembre 2011 04:03:05 HAEC À : <stephane.vangelder@indom.com<mailto:stephane.vangelder@indom.com>> Dear Stephane One of my GAC members has alerted me to the blog post cited below, asserting that the GAC position on the UDRP review was somehow drafted by the law firm, Covington and Burling. In the event this issue might be raised during your Council call on September 22, I felt it important to assure you that the GAC position was in fact drafted by a small group of GAC members, circulated to the entire GAC list, and edited by a number of GAC members before being finalized. It is my understanding that one of the GAC members involved in the initial drafting exercise did consult with domestic stakeholders and accepted a proposed edit from a lawyer with Covington and Burling to insert a direct reference to the Board's rationale for approving the new gTLD program, with a cite to that report. For reasons I do not understand, the tag to the firm remained in subsequent versions of the draft and now appears in the final version as well. That should not be understood by the GNSO Council to suggest that the firm drafted the GAC text. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Best regards, Heather