statement on USG proposal GAC-Board Discussion on Rec. 6

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Still reading through, but wondering is there any value in producing 3 separate statements, one on each of the topics?  Might find we have different levels of support on different sections.

Another question I have recently been wondering about: when the Board and GAC speak,  will they only be discussing the implementation or will they also be challenging the decisions made in relation to the GNSO recommendations.
e.g., are they challenging the 'protect the right of others' recommendation or just its implementation, is GNSO recommendation 6 the problem or the MAPO/LPIO implementation?  I.e is the issue the implementation or the whole basis of the program?

The answer to this might affect the way the response is phrased.

a.

On 10 Feb 2011, at 23:12, Robin Gross wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> Thanks for the initial drafts and edits to this group statement.  I've made some additional suggested edits to the latest draft circulated (attached).
> 
> I think the draft still needs to have the trademark issues beefed up (Konstantinos?) and would benefit tremendously from Bill's copyediting skills.  I suspect the document will end up as a "NCUC comment", but we'll see....
> 
> Any other comments and suggested edits to the group statement?
> 
> What kind of time frame are we on for finalizing this comment?  I suppose we should have something final to present at least 1 week before the Brussels meeting.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> <NCSG Statement on USG Proposal-MM-RDG-edits.doc>
> 
> 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
> 
> 
>