No problems Chuck.
I was hoping your Constituency may have been able to assist you
in the response. It didn’t necessarily have to come from you...
Once again, sorry for pushing the point and I hope the words “send
him to the chair” weren’t part of your deliberations (on the jury anyway...) J
Regards,
Adrian Kinderis
Managing Director
AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@ausregistry.com
Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com
The information contained in this communication is intended for
the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally
privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended
recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on
it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies
from your system and notify us immediately.
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com]
Sent: Friday, 18 April 2008 9:35 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis; Council GNSO
Cc: Maher, David
Subject: RE: [council] RyC Confusingly Similar Statement
Yes. I just finished 3 weeks of jury duty yesterday and am
now trying hard to catch up.
Chuck
From: Adrian
Kinderis [mailto:adrian@ausregistry.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 7:22 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO
Cc: Maher, David
Subject: RE: [council] RyC Confusingly Similar Statement
Chuck,
Can we expect to see a response to my clarification email any
time soon?
Sorry to be a pest...
Adrian Kinderis
Managing Director
AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@ausregistry.com
Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com
The information contained in this communication is intended for
the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally
privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended
recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on
it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies
from your system and notify us immediately.
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Friday, 18 April 2008 8:11 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO
Cc: David W. Maher
Subject: RE: [council] RyC Confusingly Similar Statement
We have learned, to our embarrassment, that one paragraph
of the RyC Confusingly Similar Statement I distributed to the Council list
on 10 April is incorrect.
The paragraph that reads, "For example, assume that different registry
operators were approved for .Munich and .München. If a cybersquatter
registered the domain names XYZ.Munich and XYZ.München, then the owner of
the trademark XYZ would have to file two separate complaints under the Uniform
Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). Also, the implementation of a panel
decision against the cybersquatter would need to involve both registries, but,
if both gTLDs were registered with the same registry, that complication could
be avoided." should be deleted (or ignored) since it does not accurately
reflect the procedural rules of the URDP.
Thanks to Mike Rodenbaugh for pointing this error out.
Chuck
From:
owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf
Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 10:31 AM
To: Council GNSO
Cc: Maher, David
Subject: [council] RyC Confusingly Similar Statement
Here's
a statement developed by the RyC regarding New gTLD Recommendation 2,
hopefully providing some new thoughts in that regard.
Chuck