[council] Nominations for IRT Participants
Konstantinos Komaitis
k.komaitis at STRATH.AC.UK
Sat Mar 14 14:14:05 CET 2009
This is a good (and our only I guess) plan I¹ve tried to get answers to
our questions by various trademark people but this is more difficult than
actually finding answers to the Loch Ness monster mystery. I am very happy
to work with Mary on this after they have published something and provide
the NCUC response.
Best
Konstantinos
On 13/03/2009 20:17, "Robin Gross" <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I agree with you and Milton on this.
>
> Equal participation on a fair and balanced team is not an option since the
> trademark industry is itself in charge of the process and running the "team".
> It is not realistic to obtain competent participation from high level
> trademark experts without confirmed dates and other basic information about
> the commitment they are being asked to make to an ICANN process. Especially
> on such short notice.
>
> We should direct the "team" towards the papers NCUC submitted just a year ago
> on this very issue from neutral trademark law professors Christine Haight
> Farley <http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/06/06/farley-legal-briefing/> and Jaqui
> Lipton <http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/06/06/lipton-legal-briefing/> .
>
> And perhaps Konstantinos and Mary can work on a response to the proposal put
> forward by the "team". No doubt the proposal will be identical to what the
> trademark industry has been calling for in the various public comments, so we
> know what to expect.
>
> The question will be how much weight will the "team's" proposal be given by
> the Board.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
> On Mar 13, 2009, at 4:55 AM, William Drake wrote:
>
>> I have come to agree with Milton that we should not participate in this and
>> should have a coordinated response to its outputs.
>>
>> BD
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2009, at 6:44 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Another aspect of this "team" that I find astonishing is how ICANN is
>>> opening its wallet to fly the IPC and its friends around the world to put on
>>> their "sky is falling show", but sends ALAC members home from ICANN meetings
>>> a day early to save on travel expenses.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 12, 2009, at 10:19 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks, Bill,
>>>>
>>>> It seems clear that IPC isn't really looking for a balanced team and is
>>>> just looking for a team of itself to vocalize its own complaints.
>>>>
>>>> It is not possible to ask someone to participate in a realistic way before
>>>> tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> There is no information about what we would be asking people to do. All
>>>> we know is that a team member must be willing to give up 2 "mystery
>>>> weekends" between now and April (or is it mid-week?).
>>>>
>>>> We don't know where. We don't know when. We don't know for how long.
>>>> We don't have an agenda or anything that would make this meeting seem like
>>>> a sincere effort to include others not in the IPC.
>>>>
>>>> I can't imagine asking a reputable law professor to participate in this
>>>> circus at this point.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Robin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:00 AM, William Drake wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, this is interesting, in several respects...
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: Rosette, Kristina <krosette at cov.com>
>>>>> Date: Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 2:43 PM
>>>>> Subject: RE: [council] Nominations for IRT Participants
>>>>> To: council at gnso.icann.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Bill,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, extending the deadline is simply not possible given the dea
>>>>> dlines provided by the Board in the resolution and the work that needs to
>>>>> be done. Moreover, a large number of people from almost every
>>>>> constituency and some of the ACs had already contacted IPC members about
>>>>> participating and had been provided similar information to that set forth
>>>>> below. I posted the
>>>>> message below in an effort to provide the information for dissemination to
>>>>> those who had not already contacted IPC members. As for the Board's
>>>>> intent, I believe the language of the resolution speaks for itself.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kristina
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 5:21 AM
>>>>>> To: Rosette, Kristina
>>>>>> Cc: council at gnso.icann.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [council] Nominations for IRT Participants
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Kristina,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for this information, which I've just passed on to NCUC.
>>>>>> However, I would strongly suggest that we extend the deadline to Monday
>>>>>> or Tuesday. Notification at 11pm on the 11th of a 13th noon deadline is
>>>>>> a very unworkable turnaround time if we are serious about getting strong
>>>>>> applicants and engagement from all constituencies, as the board intends.
>>>>>> Some people might not be reading mail today or be able to determine so
>>>>>> quickly whether the workload fits with their schedule etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 11, 2009, at 11:00 PM, Rosette, Kristina wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because we've received a number of inquiries about nominations for
>>>>>>> IRT participants, we thought it would be helpful to provide the
>>>>>>> information below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nominations for IRT participants should be sent to Steve Metalitz
>>>>>>> (IPC President), Ute, Cyril or me. Steve's email address is not on
>>>>>>> the Council page or the IPC home page so please contact me off-list
>>>>>>> if you would like it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The nominations must include:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. The full name and contact information of the nominee (including
>>>>>>> the name of her/his employer and title);
>>>>>>> 2. The ICANN Geographic Region(s) in which the nominee is a citizen
>>>>>>> and is a resident;
>>>>>>> 3. Identification of the nominee's knowledge, experience, and
>>>>>>> expertise in the fields of trademark, consumer protection, or
>>>>>>> competition law, and the interplay of trademarks and the domain name
>>>>>>> system;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. Identification of any financial ownership or senior
>>>>>>> management/leadership interest of the nominee in registries,
>>>>>>> registrars or other entities that are stakeholders or interested
>>>>>>> parties in ICANN or any entity with which ICANN has a transaction,
>>>>>>> contract, or other arrangement;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5. State if the nominee would be representing any other party or
>>>>>>> person through her/his IRT participation and, if so, identify that
>>>>>>> party or person; and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. State if the nominee submitted public comments on the first
>>>>>>> draft of the DAG that provided proposed solutions to the trademark
>>>>>>> issues and, if so, attach a copy of those comments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We must receive all nominations not later than Friday, 13 March, at
>>>>>>> noon EDT. Because of the deadlines set forth by the Board in the
>>>>>>> resolution, it will be exceedingly difficult to consider any nominations
>>>>>>> submitted after that point. Also, based on very preliminary time
>>>>>>> lines, IRT participants should expect to spend at least 15 full business
>>>>>>> days (excluding travel time) in the next two months on the team's
>>>>>>> work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kristina
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
>
--
Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,
Lecturer in Law,
GigaNet Membership Chair,
University of Strathclyde,
The Lord Hope Building,
141 St. James Road,
Glasgow, G4 0LT,
UK
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
email: k.komaitis at strath.ac.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090314/3f293b11/attachment.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list