Respectfully, I don't think in #4 that those are the 2 choices before this PDP at this stage? Another option, perhaps the leading one, includes "making no changes at all" to existing DRPs, and instead focus on education, which might be a very legitimate finding "based on WG discussions from prior meetings". Although, I suppose "making no changes at all" might be considered as a (very uninteresting) subset of "amending existing processes" --- i.e. in no way amending them. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> wrote:
Dear WG members,
With apologies for the slight delay, here is the proposed agenda for our next WG call, scheduled for Wednesday 29 April 2015 at 1600 UTC:
Roll call/updates to SOI Summary of GAC advice to ICANN Board concerning protections for IGO names and acronyms (see attached) Review status of GNSO work concerning preventative and curative rights protections for IGO names and acronyms (staff to update) Discuss merits and disadvantages of amending existing dispute resolution processes compared to developing a new and separate procedure (based on WG discussions from prior meetings) Next steps/next meeting
Thanks and cheers Mary
Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong@icann.org
_______________________________________________ Gnso-igo-ingo-crp mailing list Gnso-igo-ingo-crp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-igo-ingo-crp