Ugh, that will be 3 a.m. in the morning for me as I will be in Singapore, but I'll try to make it ... :) Thanks everyone!


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong@law.unh.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 


>>>

From:

Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@icann.org>

To:

"gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>

CC:

"gnso-secs@icann.org" <gnso-secs@icann.org>

Date:

12/6/2012 7:20 PM

Subject:

[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 recording SCI meeting - Thursday 6 December 2012

Dear All, 


The next call for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting is scheduled on Thursday 20 December 2012 at 20:00 UTC


Please find the MP3 rerecording and transcript of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday 6 December 2012 at 20:00UTC.

  

http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20121206-en.mp3

On page:

http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#dec

(transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page)



Attendees:

Ray Fassett – RySG

Ronald Andruff – Commercial and Business Users Constituency - Primary

Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP – Primary

J. Scott Evans – IPC Primary

Avri Doria – Non Commercial SG – Primary

Anne Aikman-Scalese – IPC Alternate


Apologies : 

Angie Graves – Commercial and Business Users Constituency – Alternate

Mary Wong -NCUC

James Bladel – Registrar Stakeholder Group - Alternate

Jennifer Standiford


ICANN Staff:

Marika Konings
Julia Charvolen




** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

 

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you.


Kind regards,

Julia Charvolen

For GNSO Secretariat


Adobe Connect chat transcript:


 Julie Hedlund:Welcome Avri

  Julie Hedlund:Hi Anne

  Ron A:Just fell off the call, but was not suggesting you would loss ;o)

  avri:Ron, it is quite alreaight.  It is midnight here  and it sounded that way to me, but it amused me.  no worries.  you have to realie i have been doing ITU and diplomatic double talk to 2.5 weeks now.

  avri:... for 2.5 weeks now

  avri:Really good question

  Ron A:@ Avri - I feel your pain...

  Ron A:@ Anne: That is my issue

  avri:Yes, it could be easy to just add a line that says a suspeiton must be for a fixed length of time.

  avri:but who give notice.  and what is the vote thershold of that motion.

  Ron A:For those who have served on the Council, this may not be an issue, but from the outside looking in, it looks like an open loop.

  Ron A:Or better said: loophole

  Marika Konings:No new vote would be required - the motion would contain the 'timeinterval' for suspension as noted in the footnote at which point the PDP would resume

  J. Scott:I think Marika has made a very valid point

  Marika Konings:with the previous instance ('thick' Whois) the PDP was restarted (without a vote) before the actual end date of the original suspension

  Marika Konings:as there was Council agreement

  J. Scott:Yes, Wolf-Ulrich.  I was saying "simple majority"

  Ron A:IF the time suspension is included in the motion, THEN I am okay with this.

  J. Scott:What if we insert the term "stated" before the wording "time interval"

  avri:i need to drop off now.

  Marika Konings:I think that would be a useful clarification

  avri:will stay on adobe

  Ron A:I support J Scott's proposal

  Ray Fassett:agree with J Scott.  Appears to me the issue is making clear that a time interval to resume is inherent with the suspension

  Marika Konings:Exactly - no other vote required if timeframe is included in the motion

  Marika Konings:it would automatically restart, unless the Council would take another vote

  Ray Fassett:I think the time interval should be case by case vs. hard scripting

  Ron A:Thank you, Marika.

  Wolf Knoben:Thanks to all