Hi, Just for the record, I at least did not suggest that the board's deadline be disregarded. I suggested that the turn around time on the call for nominations be more than one day, e.g. the deadline for nominations could have been Monday instead of Friday, in which case NCUC would have had the weekend to go through a proper constituency process on a nomination. An extension of one working day surely would not thrown off the whole calendar. BD On Mar 16, 2009, at 5:57 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:

Tim,

I do not believe it would be appropriate for the IPC to decide unilaterally to disregard the Board's deadlines. Perhaps you could direct your question to Rita and/or Bruce?

K

-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 12:22 PM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] Nominations for IRT Participants

Why are the deadlines given by the Board any more written in stone than those in the Bylaws? The latter have been missed on almost every PDP ever done. Doesn't the argument that it is more important for the work to be done right, have integrity, and instill confidence just as important here?

I agree that the IP and Business community shoul have their legitimate concerns addressed before the new gTLD process can move forward. But there is nothing to gain in the long term by a mad rush to an end game that doesn't work well or as expected.

Tim

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] Nominations for IRT Participants From: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@cov.com> Date: Thu, March 12, 2009 8:43 am To: <council@gnso.icann.org>

Hi Bill,

Unfortunately, extending the deadline is simply not possible given the deadlines provided by the Board in the resolution and the work that needs to be done. Moreover, a large number of people from almost every constituency and some of the ACs had already contacted IPC members about participating and had been provided similar information to that set forth below. I posted the message below in an effort to provide the information for dissemination to those who had not already contacted IPC members. As for the Board's intent, I believe the language of the resolution speaks for itself.

Kristina

From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 5:21 AM To: Rosette, Kristina Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] Nominations for IRT Participants

Hi Kristina,

Thanks for this information, which I've just passed on to NCUC. However, I would strongly suggest that we extend the deadline to Monday or Tuesday. Notification at 11pm on the 11th of a 13th noon deadline is a very unworkable turnaround time if we are serious about getting strong applicants and engagement from all constituencies, as the board intends. Some people might not be reading mail today or be able to determine so quickly whether the workload fits with their schedule etc.

Thanks,

Bill

On Mar 11, 2009, at 11:00 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:

All, Because we've received a number of inquiries about nominations for IRT participants, we thought it would be helpful to provide the information below. Nominations for IRT participants should be sent to Steve Metalitz (IPC President), Ute, Cyril or me. Steve's email address is not on the Council page or the IPC home page so please contact me off-list if you would like it. The nominations must include: 1. The full name and contact information of the nominee (including the name of her/his employer and title); 2. The ICANN Geographic Region(s) in which the nominee is a citizen and is a resident; 3. Identification of the nominee's knowledge, experience, and expertise in the fields of trademark, consumer protection, or competition law, and the interplay of trademarks and the domain name system; 4. Identification of any financial ownership or senior management/leadership interest of the nominee in registries, registrars or other entities that are stakeholders or interested parties in ICANN or any entity with which ICANN has a transaction, contract, or other arrangement; 5. State if the nominee would be representing any other party or person through her/his IRT participation and, if so, identify that party or person; and 6. State if the nominee submitted public comments on the first draft of the DAG that provided proposed solutions to the trademark issues and, if so, attach a copy of those comments. We must receive all nominations not later than Friday, 13 March, at noon EDT. Because of the deadlines set forth by the Board in the resolution, it will be exceedingly difficult to consider any nominations submitted after that point. Also, based on very preliminary time lines, IRT participants should expect to spend at least 15 full business days (excluding travel time) in the next two months on the team's work. Kristina