Thanks Mary, Julie, Ariel and Berry, As I am unlikely to make this call, please consider this my contribution: I would like to reiterate my observation that the 4 co-chair questions and their accompanying rationale are already covered in both Part 1 (Topics) and Part 2 (Questions), respectively at M (ccQ1), M (ccQ2), D (ccQ3), and G (ccQ4), and it is difficult to see the need for yet another separate document/set of questions to consider. Assuming there is consensus that these questions should in fact be addressed by the WG (which seems to be the case, given the fact that they are largely duplicative of existing Topics/Questions (see above)), my suggestion therefore is that these 4 co-chair questions be wholly incorporated into Part 1 (Topics) and Part 2 (Questions), and that the WG proceed to addressing the consolidated list of Topics/Questions. In procedural terms, if as a member of the WG, a co-chair believes there are questions not already included in the list of Topics/Questions, they should be put forward to the WG for its consideration, by email or during our calls. The current co-chair statement approach risks running afoul of the respective roles set out for Chairs and Members established in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines (respectively 2.2.1 (“The purpose of a Chair is to call meetings, preside over working group deliberations, manage the process…”) and 2.5 (“member Responsibilities include: Develop and draft working-group documents; Contribute ideas and knowledge to working group discussions…”)). Moreover, as to the evidentiary standard, given that the WG is not privy to URS pleadings, and the determinations themselves are largely lacking in (legal) reasoning the task of assessing whether the appropriate evidentiary standard has been applied risks being an exercise in partly informed (and potentially biased) second-guessing. Thank you for your consideration. Brian Brian Beckham | Head, Internet Dispute Resolution Section | WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center 34 chemin des Colombettes, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland | T +4122 338 8247 | E brian.beckham@wipo.int<mailto:brian.beckham@wipo.int> | www.wipo.int<http://www.wipo.int/> From: gnso-rpm-wg [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 10:24 PM To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Agenda and Materials for 01 February 2018 Meeting Hello everyone, The next Working Group meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 01 February at 0400 UTC (31 January for some locations). On the agenda is Part Three: Co-Chairs’ Statement on URS Review, pages 9-10 of the attached document. In addition, the Co-Chairs will preview the agenda for the 07 February meeting on the URS Case Review template. Note: Working Group members are encouraged to send any comments on the Co-Chairs’ Statement to this list. If the comments can be addressed on the list the Thursday meeting may be canceled. For reference, the notes from the previous discussion on the Co-Chair’s Statement may be found on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2018-01-10+Review+of+all+Ri.... Thanks and cheers Mary, Julie, Ariel and Berry