[council] Nominations for IRT Participants

[William Drake]

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 deadlines 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090313/98fb4e57/attachment.html>