Hi All, And here are the attached slightly edited files that I think are ready for the WG! Safe travels to Dublin! Kathy -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai4] Updated Sub Team 4 report Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:04:40 -0400 From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com> To: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org>, McGrady, Paul D. <PMcGrady@winston.com>, gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <gnso-ppsai4@icann.org> Hi Mary, I would be willing to accept circulation of the following attached and lightly edited Subteam 4 Report and Summary. This is revised slightly to include: 1) that the Data Metrics might be appropriate (as we have not seen it and it has not been adopted) 2) and the noncontroversial parts of Category F and G. We did this work and it should be in the summary recommendation listing. 3) We also discussed extensively a mention in the final report of the many comments asking us NOT to adopt an accreditation system, and that we acknowledge their existence. With the attached slight edited files (2), I would approve this going to the full WG. Best, Kathy ps. Updated text for E, F and G. *Category E: Additional Reasons For/Against the Accreditation Program* 1. We believe that the WG has addressed this concern adequately to date, in particular if the WG proceeds to recommend post-implementation review as described in Category D. The Sub Team notes that such a review could address the questions raised by many commenters as to the need and justification for an Accreditation Program. The Sub Team notes that short summary of the many comments expressing concern over creation of an accreditation process should be reflected briefly in the final report. ** Category F – Additional due process concerns not already covered by other Sub Teams 1.The WG should also consider which law it deems should apply to the Request: the law of the P/P customer’s location, the law of the P/P provider’s location (likely the law mentioned in the agreement with the customer, the law of the location of the aggrieved party. Category G: Other specific topics within WG scope not captured by the above categories. 1.Consider the whole of the final report in context to review, assess (and correct as needed) whether “due process” has been incorporated at every stage of the processes being created. On 10/13/2015 1:36 PM, Mary Wong wrote:
Hello again everyone,
In view of the time and Paul’s travel today, perhaps I can circulate what we have now to the full WG, as always with the caveat that the documents have not been reviewed by the Sub Team and with the further note that they do not as yet cover Categories F and G. That will allow the Sub Team to keep discussing these two categories, as necessary, and you can suggest focusing the WG discussion in Dublin on the first few categories (as I think no more than an hour has been allocated by the co-chairs for the session covering the Sub Team report).
Cheers Mary
Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4889 Email: mary.wong@icann.org
From: "McGrady, Paul D." <PMcGrady@winston.com <mailto:PMcGrady@winston.com>> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 12:38 To: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com>, "gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai4@icann.org>" <gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai4@icann.org>>, Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [Gnso-ppsai4] Updated Sub Team 4 report
I leave for the airport for Dublin in about 3 hours, so I’m not sure what can be finalized on the other categories before then. I think we need to get what we have to the full WG today so that they have time to think it through. We can always supplement later.
Best,
Paul
*From:*gnso-ppsai4-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-ppsai4-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman *Sent:* Tuesday, October 13, 2015 11:02 AM *To:* gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai4@icann.org>; Mary Wong *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai4] Updated Sub Team 4 report
Hi Mary and All, I think we should finalize F and G before we circulate to the full WG. I'll circulate something to our subteam in a bit.
Best, Kathy
On 10/13/2015 10:57 AM, Mary Wong wrote:
Hello members of Sub Team 4,
The WG co-chairs would like to finalize the Dublin F2F meeting agenda, including sending out the updated Sub Team report before the end of the day. If there are no objections, I’ll proceed to do so with, of course, all the usual caveats.
Kathy and Paul, how do you want to approach the topics that we did not manage to cover on the Friday call (Categories F and G)? Perhaps Sub Team members can send their thoughts, concerns and comments to this list before the Dublin F2F meeting to kickstart an email discussion so that you can determine how best to present those topics?
Thanks and cheers
Mary
Mary Wong
Senior Policy Director
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
Email: <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>mary.wong@icann.org
*From: *Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> *Date: *Monday, October 12, 2015 at 18:18 *To: *<gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <mailto:gnso-ppsai4@icann.org>> *Cc: *'PPSAI Chairs' <gnso-ppsai-chairs@icann.org> *Subject: *Updated Sub Team 4 report
Dear WG chairs and Sub Team 4 members,
As requested by the Sub Team 4 members who were able to participate in the Friday call, I’ve updated the Sub Team 4 report to reflect that discussion. Please note that this document has not yet been reviewed by any Sub Team 4 member, and represents staff’s attempt to capture the gist of the Friday discussion. I have accepted all the changes from Categories A through E that were in the last version circulated by Kathy (version 3), so this document (version 4) shows the changes I’ve made in those five categories, while retaining all the previous changes and comments that are in Category F and Category G, which the Sub Team did not get through on Friday.
Also attached is a summary document that contains only the recommendations and conclusions from the draft Sub Team report (as updated). I am including this as I thought it may make it easier for Don, Steve and Graeme to review, to see where things are.
Don, Steve and Graeme – please note that several items have been flagged for further WG discussion, and have been marked as such in both documents. While each recommendation should certainly be reviewed by all WG members, these flagged items represent either topics where the Sub Team has not yet come to agreement or otherwise believes the topic should be brought back to the full WG. Of these topics, I believe that */on the Friday call the group highlighted the question as to whether accreditation could lead to the loss of the right to counsel (Category D-2) as being the one item likely to be most usefully discussed at the Friday face to face meeting. Another topic that could be raised at the Friday meeting is the question of penalties for repetitive abuses of the program (Category C-2)/*.
Kathy, Paul, Vicky and all – can you confirm or otherwise highlight, the topics that you think would benefit particularly from a WG discussion on Friday?
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 <mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai4 mailing list
Gnso-ppsai4@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-ppsai4@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai4
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.