Dear all:
I think the updated version of the document looks great, and would only add one inquiry to the Working Group phase of the PDP, namely whether it is possible to
create a neutral party, possibly within ICANN staff, charged with flagging any PDPs with clear public policy implications for the GAC.
The aim is to lighten their load in making sure that PDPs with obvious policy implications, such as the recently initiated Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation
PDP, do not slip through any cracks. It would be great to hear views on this suggestion.
Thank you,
Brian
Brian J. Winterfeldt
Head of Internet Practice
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118
p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244
brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com /
www.kattenlaw.com
From:
gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 8:53 AM
To: GAC-GNSO-CG@icann.org
Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] GNSO / GAC Early Engagement Document
All,
For our records, an updated version of document which tracks current and purposed mechanisms for GAC engagement in the GNSO PDP.
Jonathan