Re: [council] retabling agenda item 3 from the 27 July pNC telecon

[Richard Lindsay <richard@interq.ad.jp>]

Ted,

Sorry for the lack of constant communcation,  but there has
been quite a bit of movement with regard to the voluntary
Uniform Dispute Resoultion Policy, and this exact issue.  The discussions
have included WIPO, and last weeks meeting in Washington DC
regarding this included Jonathan Cohen as well (and NSI's
representatives.) 

I will forward the most recent proposal, which is being worked
on by AOL and Register.com's lawyers, and NSI and WIPO.  I think
that it sufficiently achieves the intent of your proposal, but
in a significantly different way.  Thus your proposal would
likely not be required, as it would be covered by the UDRP (which
will become a reality in practice).

I will send the document in a separate message.

Best regards,
Richard

"Shapiro, Ted" wrote:
> 
> Dear pNC,
> 
> Further to the last pNC telecon, during which it was decided that, in
> response to a request by the registrars that this issue be further
> postponed,  a "full" report be submitted by 6 August. However, as I have not
> received any further input from the registrars, I am retabling the report
> and draft protocol that I submitted to the pNC and was posted on the DNSO
> site before the last pNC telecon on 27 July. I would ask that pNC members go
> back to their constituencies with the report and draft protocol and consult
> them in order to be ready to vote on this issue in Santiago.
> 
> Although I have not received any detailed feedback from the registrars on
> this isse, I note that Richard Lindsay "fully support[s] the intent" of this
> proposal (see email to the pNC of 27 July 1999). Ken Stubbs has also noted
> that "the same desired objective  can be easily be achieved, without
> restricting the portability of names, by simply providing that once a
> dispute policy is invoked any transferee registrar will abide by the result
> of that invocation?" (see email to the pNC of 27 July 1999).
> 
> I have not received any feedback on Ken's suggestion, but I have had several
> requests from members of my constituency that I continue to raise this issue
> with the pNC and that I retable the report and draft protocol. We still
> believe that this is vital issue. WGA may have finished its report, but a
> UDRP is still far from being a reality. As the number of registrars goes
> from 5 to 57, the potential for abuse grows.
> 
> Best regards,
> Ted

-- 
_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay