Fwd: Intersponsive's URS Advisory Board

[Alex Gakuru]

Dear Kathy,

We would be deeply honourned by your service in this new capacity.

Sincerely,

Alex

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com>wrote:

>  Hi David and Everyone,
> I think this position may involve some work, but I would like to volunteer
> to undertake it.  While the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) was a process
> introduced to us by the Intellectual Property Constituency and Business
> Constituency in the in IRT report, we managed to negotiate safeguards,
> limits and due process in the STI Team.
>
> I spent many hundreds of hours working on the URS as part of the STI team,
> and feel strongly about seeing the implementation take place according to
> the rules we have drawn up. In particular, we want to ensure that
> "defaults," or the failure of a individual, organization or company to
> respond in the very short time allowed under the URS are fully evaluated by
> attorneys with trademark law experience and expertise.  A number of
> potential URS Service Providers (WIPO in particular) have tried to cut back
> on this guarantee and commitment (which is a very clear commitment that we,
> NCUC/NCSG, ensured was in the Guidebook).
>
> Intersponsive has already made the commitment to keep the URS rules as
> drafted.  They did  so openly and publicly at the URS Session in Toronto --
> when NAF and WIPO said they could not. So already, Intersponsive has a
> "good check" by its name. It's a new service provider, and one clearly open
> to input and advice, otherwise we would not have been invited on their
> advisory board.
>
> We also wrote into the URS additional fairness issues missing from the
> UDRP, including rotation of panelists -- so that same one person cannot be
> appointed again and again to give one (pro-IP) decision -- as has happened
> so many times at WIPO. I want to see all of these commitments, and more,
> come to fruition.
>
> As you know, I am Internet Counsel for Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth, and a
> co-founder of the NCUC (with so many wonderful people). If you would like,
> I would be happy to serve in this new capacity.
>
> Best,
> Kathy
>
> --------------------------
> David Cake wrote:
> :
>
> Interesponsive Corporation intends to respond to ICANNs URS RFI, and is
> seeking input from the community. I know NCUC has several members with a
> strong interest in the URS, would any be interested in taking up their
> offer?
>
>  Regards
>
>  David
>
> From Paul D. McGrady Jr.
>
> As many of you know from the URS session in Toronto, we represent
> Intersponsive Corporation.  Intersponsive intends to file a response to
> ICANN’s recent RFI related to the URS.  As mentioned in our presentation,
> Intersponsive believes that the URS is implementable at the community
> requested price point without substantive changes at this late stage. ****
> ** **
> In order to ensure that Intersponsive takes a balanced approach during
> this initial phase and (should ICANN select it as a URS provider) after
> launch, Responsive is requesting that each constituency consider appointing
> a constituency member who is willing to serve on Intersponsive’s URS
> Advisory Board.  Intersponsive welcomes the dialogue and clarity created by
> having  every voice at the table.  If there are new voices or new subgroups
> (e.g. NTAG, etc.) resulting from the new gTLD rollout, Intersponsive wishes
> to include them as well.  Intersponsive understands that the new gTLD
> rollout has created nuances of opinions and interests and Intersponsive
> welcomes those voices.****
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20121119/8db15d95/attachment-0001.html>