Thanks Julie
Regarding the Google sheet summary for agenda item 4, I would not characterise line 14 on the responses tab as opposing John McElwaine’s proposal but rather as supporting
it:
Cyntia King (to Jeff Neuman): Thanks for the technical expertise, Jeff. Although I would find it gratifying,
after 2 years of work, to knock out a report on all the new RPMs, I find the current GDPR work a fatal impediment to completing the review of URS & UDRP separately. Work on the Providers sub-team has convinced me that the URS and UDRP share similar mechanisms
& processes (for example: RPM provider reporting, the hiring/training/monitoring of examiners, notification of parties to RPM proceedings, etc.) most easily addressed together. As well, many of these mechanisms & processes will be similarly impacted by the
GDPR. I think it makes sense at this point to address the URS & UDRP together, especially as the moving parts of the GDRP eventually fall into place.
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-April/002912.html
Could I suggest that this be moved to the “support” section please.
Susan Payne
Head of Legal Policy
|
Valideus Ltd
E:
susan.payne@valideus.com
D: +44 20 7421 8255
T: +44 20 7421 8299
M: +44 7971 661175
From: gnso-rpm-wg [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: 27 April 2018 21:38
To: gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org
Subject: [gnso-rpm-wg] Proposed agenda for RPM Working Group call on 25 April 2018 at 1200 UTC
Per the WG Co-Chairs, here is the proposed agenda for the Working Group call Wednesday, 02 May 2018, scheduled for 1700 UTC. Times are proposed as estimates and may be adjusted.
Proposed Agenda:
Best regards,
Mary, Julie, Ariel and Berry