November 2025 - Igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt

IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Meeting #16 | 3 December 2025, 14:00-15:00 UTC
by Renate De Wulf Nov. 21, 2025

Nov. 21, 2025

Dear All, Meeting #16 of the IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT will be held on 3 December 2025 at 14:00-15:00 UTC [local time<https://tinyurl.com/4ybdrj2d>]. The final agenda will be posted here<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/AQA8JQ>. Before the meeting, please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en>, the ICANN Community Anti-Harassment Policy<https://www.icann.org/en/governance/documents/icann-community-anti-harassme…> and the ICANN Community Participant Code of Conduct<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/adopted-icann-community-partici…>. We would like to remind participants that to ensure transparency of participation in ICANN's multistakeholder model, we ask that you sign in to Zoom sessions using your full name. For example, First Name and Last Name or Surname. You may be removed from the session if you do not sign in using your full name. Zoom information: Join the Zoom Webinar directly (recommended): https://icann.zoom.us/j/98045783633?pwd=r1KFqiOWf27TryA5XkPPONZMui9j6s.1 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/98045783633?pwd=r1KFqiOW…> Meeting ID: 980 4578 3633 Passcode: B*1siuUn&R Zoom Audio only: One tap mobile +13017158592,,98045783633#,,,,*4650718506# US (Washington DC) +13126266799,,98045783633#,,,,*4650718506# US (Chicago) Meeting ID: 980 4578 3633 Passcode: 4650718506 Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/a7FNVvMGM [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/a7FNVvMGM__;!!PtGJab4!57…> Should you be unable to attend the meeting, please let us know in advance. A recording will be made available. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions. Best regards, Renate

1 0

Re: Doodle Poll - IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Meeting
by Renate De Wulf Nov. 20, 2025

Nov. 20, 2025

Hello, Just a gentle reminder for those of you who haven’t yet filled in the doodle. Thank you. Best, Renate From: Renate De Wulf via Igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt <igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Renate De Wulf <renate.dewulf(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, 17 November 2025 at 11:08 To: "igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt(a)icann.org" <igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt(a)icann.org> Subject: [Igo-ingo-curative-rights-irt] Doodle Poll - IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Meeting Dear IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Members, We have created a doodle poll for the next meeting of this group. https://doodle.com/group-poll/participate/er7DvQWa [doodle.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/doodle.com/group-poll/participate/er7DvQ…> Thank you for taking a few minutes to do this poll. We will close the poll on Thursday CoB. Thank you. Best, Renate

1 0

Re: ICANN: IGO CURATIVE RIGHTS - Follow-Up following ICANN84 Discussions
by Peter Eakin Nov. 19, 2025

Nov. 19, 2025

Dear IRT, Thank you to those who have already responded to the rationale<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CDkX-FNmNMncwVS6VBoKL2aDnKSmOrQ-SlTKVzp…>. We encourage further input, especially from remaining members yet to share their views, either following the structure suggested in the issuing email or in any other format that members prefer. Based on current responses, I expect to confirm a meeting date tomorrow - December 3 appears to be the preferred option and would provide more time for additional input. To support further discussion, I would like to briefly restate the purpose of the rationale and the context in which it was provided. During our meeting in Dublin, a view was expressed that the UDRP redlines would allow the new arbitral process proposed in the EPDP Final Report<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/generic-names-supporting-organization-co…> to be initiated prior to a UDRP decision (an interpretation held to apply equally to URS proceedings). As this view had not been raised previously during our meetings - and appeared to inform the IRTs support for sending the UDRP redlines to public comment - staff considered it important to clarify the issue, confirm the extent of agreement within the IRT on this point, and ensure everyone was working from a shared understanding. So, firstly, if this was not the precise argument advanced in Dublin, we welcome any corrections. In response to some of the feedback provided so far, the rationale was not intended to argue that the new arbitral route is only available after court action, or that a losing registrant must first go to court to access it. Rather, it reflects what is contained in the current UDRP and URS redlines, which were drafted based on EPDP Recommendations 3 and 4. As drafted, these recommendations allow a registrant to elect the new arbitral process in two situations: * Within 10 days of a UDRP decision or URS appeal determination, without needing to pursue court action; or * Within 10 days of a court declining to hear a case due to IGO immunity, should the respondent choose to file in court. The rationale notes that, based on the approved policy language in the Final Report, there appears to be no procedural path to initiate arbitration outside of these two 10 day windows, described in Recommendations 3 and 4 of the Final Report as occurring after a UDRP/URS determination. However, the “10 days following a court determination” scenario can also be interpreted to apply following a court action at any point, e.g. if a registrant/respondent commenced court proceedings during an ongoing UDRP/URS process. This is what is referred to when the rationale states that the new arbitral proceeding is restricted to after “the issuance of a UDRP decision or URS Determination or a court decision declining to hear the merits of the case due to an IGO Complainant’s jurisdictional immunity”. However, we acknowledge Brian’s view in his response that the EPDP WG presumed the existence of a final UDRP/URS decision during the course of its deliberations - additional IRT input on this point would be helpful. The rationale further observes that the Final Report provides no guidance on how arbitration would function or interact with the UDRP/URS before those processes conclude, including how a “de novo” review would operate in the absence of a decision. While we recognize the opinion of some members that the WG intended the new arbitral process to be available at any time during (or even in lieu of?) the UDRP/URS process, the rationale points out that it is not clear how this could be implemented under the current approved language without creating a new trigger and associated conditions in addition to the two windows set out in Recommendations 3 and 4. It also notes potential concerns about attempting to accommodate this option based on current policy language, including whether doing so could raise questions about whether the IRT is creating policy beyond the Final Report. The intent of our email, therefore, was to invite alternative interpretations and to obtain a better understand of how a hypothetical pre-UDRP/URS decision arbitration might be grounded or possible within the existing recommendations, as well as gauging the level of agreement in the IRT for such a reading. I hope this has been helpful, Kind regards, Peter Peter Eakin Policy Research Specialist, Policy Research & Stakeholder Programs Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Tel: + 32 493 547 913 Office: 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt. 1, Brussels B-1040, Belgium

1 0

ICANN: IGO CURATIVE RIGHTS - Follow-Up following ICANN84 Discussions **please see linked/attached rationale and accompanying doodle poll***
by Peter Eakin Nov. 17, 2025

Nov. 17, 2025

Dear IGO Curative Rights IRT, I hope everyone enjoyed a productive ICANN84, whether attending in person or remotely. During our IRT discussion in Dublin, we left off with a question on whether a URS or court determination is required before a registrant may elect to utilize the new arbitral proceeding we are implementing pursuant to the EPDP curative rights recommendations<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/generic-names-supporting-organization-co…>. While this discussion arose in the context of the URS and URS Rules redlines under review by the IRT, the question also exists in the draft updates to the UDRP and UDRP Rules. The approach taken in both the UDRP and URS redlines shared with the IRT to-date is that a registrant may only pursue this new arbitral proceeding after one of the following two triggering events: (a) the issuance of a UDRP or URS determination, or (b) a court decision declining to exercise jurisdiction over an IGO complainant. ICANN org understands the view expressed by some IRT members in Dublin to be that this new arbitral proceeding should ideally be available to the registrant at any point after a URS or UDRP complaint is filed. The discussion in Dublin appeared to surface a difference of approach between the URS and UDRP redlines shared with the IRT to-date and that expressed by at least a portion of IRT members. Following ICANN84, we need to determine whether the IRT as a whole disagrees with ICANN org’s interpretation of the text of the recommendations on this matter so that we can determine our path forward. To this end, we share attached a written rationale<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CDkX-FNmNMncwVS6VBoKL2aDnKSmOrQ-SlTKVzp…> for the staff interpretation to-date, and request the IRT’s written feedback on the following questions no later than 24 November. We understand that this is a short requested turnaround time, but are requesting your feedback by this date so that we can determine how to move forward expediently and minimize impacts to our implementation timeline. As you are aware, full implementation of these policy recommendations is currently planned for Q2 2026 and serves as a dependency for the release of IGO acronyms currently withheld from registration, as well as the launch of a post-registration notification system for IGOs, both scheduled for completion in Q3 2026. Questions for IRT Members 1. As an IRT member, do you believe that the UDRP, UDRP Rules, URS, and URS Rules redlines (hereinafter, “the redlines”) shared with the IRT accurately reflect the policy recommendations in the Final Report with respect to the “triggers for arbitral proceeding” issue? Please see the attached rationale for the approach taken in the redlines. 2. If not, why do you disagree with this interpretation? 3. If you disagree with the approach taken in the redlines, in your view, does your position align with or differ from the consensus of the IRT? We note that the IRT has been convened to assist staff in developing the implementation details for the policy to ensure that the implementation conforms to the intent of the policy recommendations (see IRT principles and guidelines<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/consensus-policy-implementation/irt-prin…>). In the event of a disagreement between the IRT and staff regarding the proposed implementation approach, we will strive to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be reconciled, the GNSO Council liaison, in consultation with the IRT, is expected to make an assessment as to the level of consensus within the IRT on whether to raise the issue with the GNSO Council for consideration. Next Steps Due to the issue raised in Dublin, we believe it would be premature to proceed to public comment in November as envisioned in our work plan. Please share your thoughts on the questions above on-list by Monday, 24 November. Mindful of the upcoming US holiday period, we have provisionally identified two dates for an IRT meeting, one in the week of 24 November, another in the week of 1 December - please complete the doodle poll issued by Renate earlier to indicate your availability. We will select the date most convenient for the group. We will also endeavour to schedule an additional meeting before the Christmas break if needed. As ever, happy to discuss. Best, Peter (see attached, Rationale for Approach Taken in Draft Redlines): Google link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CDkX-FNmNMncwVS6VBoKL2aDnKSmOrQ-SlTKVzp… MS Word version – attached to email Peter Eakin Policy Research Specialist, Policy Research & Stakeholder Programs Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Tel: + 32 493 547 913 Office: 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt. 1, Brussels B-1040, Belgium

4 4

Doodle Poll - IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Meeting
by Renate De Wulf Nov. 17, 2025

Nov. 17, 2025

Dear IGO-INGO Curative Rights IRT Members, We have created a doodle poll for the next meeting of this group. https://doodle.com/group-poll/participate/er7DvQWa Thank you for taking a few minutes to do this poll. We will close the poll on Thursday CoB. Thank you. Best, Renate

1 0

Post-call | IGO INGO Curative Rights IRT | Meeting #15 | 26 October 2025 | ICANN84
by Renate De Wulf Nov. 3, 2025

Nov. 3, 2025

Dear All, The recordings for Meeting #15 of the IGO INGO Curative Rights IRT held on Sunday, 26 October 2025 are published on the meeting wiki page<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/x/SwAkHg>. These include: * Audio recording * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript, chat) The attendance records will be added as soon as made available. Best regards, Renate

1 0