Thanks Mary!
All, regarding the SubTeam 4 Report, a few thoughts:
1.
Due to time constraints, many of the SubTeam members were not able to review the version of the document that Mary attached (including me). While
we did have a couple of calls to try to narrow issues and passed the document around a fair amount, everyone’s pre-Dublin schedule made diffing in and refining the document quite difficult. Since we needed to stay on schedule and produce something to discuss
this week, the document that Mary attached should be viewed as a draft of sorts since the last iteration contained significant changes and not just refinements (see attached by way of example a comparison of the version just prior to the one submitted showing
the changes made in the version Mary sent around). For example, you will see that there is a difference of opinion on whether to use the word “largely” vs. “purely.” This is sort of a big deal in the context of what is being kicked around. Just an example,
but an important one.
2.
Also, at least in my opinion, the report is meant to be more of an issues list of items which popped up in our review of dozens of comments for possible
WG discussion rather than the more refined consensus-ish recommendations coming out of the other SubTeams in their reports. While the other SubTeam’s remit was narrowed, ours was designed to go see what all may be out there lurking. So, our issues list is
a bit diverse and our recommendations really are recommendations on what the WG may want to discuss rather than recommendations on where those discussion should lead.
3.
No one took us up on our request to get issues out of our category summary document, so the kitchen sink showed up in the summary. I recommend that
the WG look over the summary and see if there are any issues which have been/are being handled by another SubTeam’s process so that we can dispatch with those quickly tomorrow.
I hope that provides a bit of background for what was submitted and what the SubTeam has been working on/thinking about. I’m looking forward to walking through
this with the WG tomorrow. Have a great night.
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: Sunday, October 04, 2015 5:33 PM
To: gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Agenda and documents for WG call on Tuesday 6 October
Dear WG members,
The proposed agenda for the next WG call, scheduled for Tuesday 6 October, is as follows:
-
Roll call/updates to SOI
-
Update on planning for Dublin face-to-face WG meeting
-
Review and discussion of Sub Team 4 report (attached)
-
[If time permits] Review and discussion of updated Illustrative Disclosure Framework from Sub Team 3 (attached)
-
Next steps
Please note that while the documents for agenda items #3 and #4 have been worked on by a number of members from each Sub Team, the versions being circulated have
not yet been fully reviewed by all members of the respective Sub Teams. Other than the addition of page numbers to facilitate WG discussion, staff has made no changes to the two documents as received.
Please also find attached proposed revised language for Section 1.3.3 of the WG report, which concerns the question of online financial transactions and was initially
the subject of work by Sub Team 2. This revised version is an update from the document first circulated on behalf of the WG co-chairs on 18 September, and represents the co-chairs’ suggested update based on the WG discussion of 22 September.
Thanks and cheers
Mary
Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
Email:
mary.wong@icann.org