motion on Chatham
Mary Wong
MWong at PIERCELAW.EDU
Thu Jan 28 00:05:38 CET 2010
Although I don't have a problem with the Chatham House rule, in deference to other members' concerns and to avoid a scenario where striking out the clause entirely would be an exercise unsupported by the other groups, how about a friendly amendment along the lines of:
"It is expected that any communications or other input sought and received will be provided in good faith, and that SOs/ACs will exercise prudence and make use of the opportunity when it is necessary to support the teams and/or convey major concerns. In exceptional circumstances, a SO or AC, the review teams or members thereof may consider it necessary to subject such communications or other input to reasonable restrictions such as the Chatham House rule, and where this is the case, the relevant parties to the affected communication or input shall, as far as possible, be informed in advance."
It's been a long day here too (and not just because of vertical integration and ICANN!) so if anyone more familiar with the issue cares to amend further, please feel free!
Cheers
Mary
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>>>
From: William Drake <william.drake at GRADUATEINSTITUTE.CH>
To:<NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date: 1/27/2010 3:28 PM
Subject: motion on Chatham
"Obviously, any such communications would need to respect reasonable
restrictions like the review teams adherence to the Chatham House rule, and the SO/ACs
should be expected to exercise prudence and to only make use of the opportunity when it is
necessary to support the teams and/or convey major concerns.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100127/62d7f8ed/attachment.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list