To socialize this with our constituencies, it would be very helpful to have an Executive Summary of how the recommended policy changes the existing policy.  Does Staff have a draft of that please?

I previously raised an issue on the list about privacy/proxy changes, challenging the notion that moving from an identifiable registrant to a P/P (or vice versa) would be a Material Change, and should trigger a Notification.  I do not believe there was ever any response on the list.  I foresee this will be an issue for the IPC, so. if anyone could briefly explain why such a change is recommended to be outside the scope of this new policy, that explanation would be very helpful and appreciated.

Thank you,
Mike

Logo

Mike Rodenbaugh

address:

548 Market Street, Box 55819

San Francisco, CA 94104

email:

mike@rodenbaugh.com

phone:

+1 (415) 738-8087

WORLD TRADEMARK REVIEW "WTR 1000" Top Global TM Counsel
2012 to present                                                            [Book a Meeting]


On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 4:41 PM Christian Wheeler <christian.wheeler@icann.org> wrote:

Dear WG Members,

 

We have reached an important point in our work where we need feedback from all working group members. 

 

We are nearing completion of our Group 1(b) Change of Registrant Data recommendations, and we will be finalizing them over the next few weeks. In short, if you are unable to participate over the next 2-3 weeks, please ensure your alternate(s) are available to participate on your behalf so that all representative groups share their perspectives on this important topic.

 

The format under which we will be gathering feedback should be familiar to many of you. Support Staff has compiled the draft preliminary recommendations in this Group 1(b) Recommendations for Initial Report worksheet. The yellow highlighted text denotes text that Support Staff has edited based on feedback from the last meeting. 

 

By Tuesday, 9 April, we ask that all Working Group members:

  1. Please review the draft preliminary recommendations in detail. 
  2. Using the tables provided (starting on p.9 of the worksheet), please identify any recommendations you believe should be changed. The tables contemplate levels of support (or lack of support):
      1. Cannot live with the recommendation as written - this means that, unless significantly altered, your group cannot live with the text being included in the Initial Report
      2. Could live with, but would prefer a change
      3. Grammatical/typographical edits 
      4. Support recommendation as written

           

  1. If you do not agree with the current text or believe edits are necessary, please identify the category (can’t live with, could live with but prefer edited text, or grammatical change), and propose alternate text. 
  2. If you can support the recommendation as written, please also affirmatively indicate your support in the green table.
  3. Please provide your feedback by group, rather than in an individual capacity. 

 

We will be using the next 2-3 weeks to go over proposed updated text (if any). We ask all groups to review the recommendations to ensure you are comfortable with the proposed text for purposes of inclusion in the Initial Report. 

 

While we do plan to have additional time to review the comprehensive report as a whole (including Group 1(a) and Group 2), the time to raise fundamental issues with the Group 1(b) text is now. 

 

Thank you for your attention and participation.

 

Best regards,

Caitlin, Berry, Julie, Feodora, and Christian

_______________________________________________
GNSO-TPR mailing list
GNSO-TPR@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr