[Ec-ncuc] NCUC letter to the GAC, RE UDRP

[Robin Gross]

Thanks, KK.  I'm really glad you are sending this letter!

Best,
Robin


On Sep 28, 2011, at 1:48 AM, Konstantinos Komaitis wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> Please find attached the final version of the letter to be sent to the GAC. Hearing everyone, I think the short, not pissing people off version is the best approach. I am planning on sending this by the end of business day today.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> KK
> 
> Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,
> 
> Senior Lecturer,
> Director of Postgraduate Instructional Courses
> Director of LLM Information Technology and Telecommunications Law
> University of Strathclyde,
> The Law School,
> Graham Hills building, 
> 50 George Street, Glasgow G1 1BA 
> UK
> tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
> http://www.routledgemedia.com/books/The-Current-State-of-Domain-Name-Regulation-isbn9780415477765
> Selected publications: http://hq.ssrn.com/submissions/MyPapers.cfm?partid=501038
> Website: www.komaitis.org
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wendy at seltzer.com] 
> Sent: ?????, 27 ??????????? 2011 2:34 ??
> To: Brenden Kuerbis
> Cc: William Drake; Rafik Dammak; Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Milton L Mueller; Mary.Wong at LAW.UNH.EDU; Konstantinos Komaitis; EC-NCUC at ipjustice.org
> Subject: Re: [Ec-ncuc] NCUC letter to the GAC, RE UDRP
> 
> +1
> Attached makes that change and minor typo/grammar suggestions.
> 
> --Wendy
> 
> On 09/27/2011 09:21 AM, Brenden Kuerbis wrote:
>> I like this revision, especially linking to the AoC.
>> 
>> On Sep 27, 2011 8:32 AM, "William Drake" <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sep 27, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> I am against the inclusion of the preferential treatment paragraph.  
>>>> I
>> think we should just make our points and demand they talk to use 
>> without this, which seems to me to be weaken the argument.
>>> 
>>> What about this as a compromise.  Replace
>>> 
>>> However, NCUC is concerned that certain GNSO stakeholders were 
>>> provided
>> access to drafts of GAC Communiques and permitted to help shape the 
>> views of the entire GAC, while other stakeholders, including NCUC, 
>> were not afforded such preferential access and opportunity to directly 
>> dialogue with the GAC on their views on the UDRP.  The preferential 
>> treatment of certain stakeholders consulted in the process of drafting 
>> the GAC Communique is troubling to noncommercial users and appears to 
>> undermine ICANN's multi-stakeholder model of checks and balances and its ability to serve the
>> public interest.   Given this, we would like to reiterate the main arguments
>> made in our comments submitted[1] during the public comment period 
>> concerning the UDRP for your consideration:
>>> 
>>> With this:
>>> 
>>> However, NCUC is concerned that certain GNSO stakeholders were 
>>> provided
>> special access to drafts of GAC Communiques and permitted to help 
>> shape the views of the GAC, while other stakeholders, including NCUC, 
>> were not.  This asymmetry in the process of drafting the GAC 
>> Communique seems contrary to both the core tenets of ICANN's 
>> multistakeholder model of checks and balances and its public interest 
>> obligations under the Affirmation of Commitments.
>>> 
>>> In this context, we would like to reiterate the main arguments made 
>>> in our
>> comments submitted[1] during the public comment period concerning the UDRP:
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 914-374-0613 Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
> https://www.chillingeffects.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/
> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
> <NCUC Letter to the GAC, re UDRP(final).pdf>




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