Thanks Mary.
I’ll be in transit today and while able to follow along on the phone, will not be in the Adobe and so unable to use chat or raise my hand etc. I believe I
have already said my peace on the issue of conflating attorneys (users of the DNS) with privacy/proxy services (providers of certain services within the DNS) and the dangers of sending a proposal up to the GNSO that interferes with attorney-client relationships,
especially at a time when ICANN will need Congressional approval for the IANA transition (The House is 37 percent attorneys and the Senate is 53 percent attorneys, so ICANN regulating the legal profession will be of some interest on The Hill).
If the WG does get this wrong and suggests that ICANN regulate attorney-client relationships, what is the process for a minority statement on this topic? Hopefully,
it won’t come to that but I’ve no interest in having my name associated with teeing up this big mess. Thanks!
Best,
Paul
|
Paul D. McGrady Jr. |
|
Partner
|
|
Chair, Trademark, Domain Names and Brand Enforcement Practice
|
|
Winston & Strawn LLP |
|
D: +1 (312) 558-5963 |
|
F: +1 (312) 558-5700 |
|
Bio | VCard | Email | winston.com |
From: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 11:05 AM
To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Agenda and documents for WG meeting on 10 November 2015
Dear WG members,
The proposed agenda for the next WG meeting on Tuesday 10 November is as follows; please note that this meeting is scheduled for
NINETY (90) minutes and will commence at 1430 UTC.
1. Roll call/updates to SOI
2. Discussion of policy-related operational concerns regarding (a) data escrow; and (b) de-accreditation (with Amy Bivins and Mike Zupke, ICANN Registrar Services Team)
3. Discussion of proposed language concerning definition of privacy and proxy service providers (see below)
4. Finalize Illustrative Disclosure Framework, particularly the two options for arbitration or jurisdiction
5. Last call for substantive questions/concerns with draft Final Report (circulated on 8 October)
6. Next steps / deadlines
Agenda item #3 is a follow up to the WG’s discussion as to whether
and how to deal with questions concerning the accreditation of service providers such as lawyers. Following from the most recent email discussions, the WG co-chairs would like to propose that the WG’s existing definitions be supplemented by this additional
language, to be further discussed on the call tomorrow:
“Registrars will not accept registrations from P/P service providers who are not accredited through the process developed by ICANN”.
For
agenda item #5, please feel free to share your comments to the list before the call as well – as we will be giving the October 8 document a final “scrub” and proof read following further changes based on subsequent WG discussions (including in Dublin),
please focus on any substantive omissions or issues that have arisen since the May issuance of the Initial Report (on which much of the draft Final Report has been based, e.g. In the sections dealing with the WG’s deliberations and processes). A copy of the
document as at 8 October – which was what was circulated before Dublin - is attached for your easy reference.
Thank you!
Cheers
Mary
Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
Email:
mary.wong@icann.org