[ALAC] New draft on Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure

[Jean-Jacques Subrenat]

Dear Rinalia,

General comments:
- We need to find out if any part of the envisaged mechanism overlaps with any of the attributions of the ICANN Ombudsman; if so, the draft should reflect that, and clarify the boundaries between the two.
- This is typically a subject on which positions of several entities within ICANN could cooperate; you mentioned GAC, and we may want to check with NCSG. Perhaps this is an opportunity for ALAC to take the lead in federating efforts?

Draft:
- A.3, I would prefer "... restore compliance..." rather than "...correct any..."
- A.4, I suggest "... and shall respond to ICANN's request by providing documentation relating to any such reports, consistent with the PICDRP".
- B.4.1, I suggest "A panel of three members (Standing Panel) shall be..."

Thank you for following this closely!

Jean-Jacques.


----- Mail original -----
De: "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" <rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com>
À: "ALAC Working List" <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Envoyé: Mercredi 28 Août 2013 09:40:04
Objet: [ALAC] New draft on Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution	Procedure

Dear ALAC Colleagues,

See attached as FYI - Latest draft on new gTLD Public Interest Commitment
Dispute Resolution Procedure (PICDRP) sent by ICANN staff to Registries
recently and will be up for discussion during the Registry call on Thursday.

*What is interesting:*
1. Third parties cannot report/file PIC violation (the entity that
files/reports  has to demonstrate that it has been harmed).
2. No mention of fees for filing violation.  Also, unclear who will bear
the cost burden when panel is constituted to render judgement.  ICANN tends
to pass on this type of cost burden to the parties.
3. Burden is on the violation filer/"reporter" to make a thorough and
complete filing of objection and to make itself available for a
"conference" or consultation.  If filings are incomplete or the reporter
doesn't show for the conference, case is dropped.
4. Reporter can be designated as "Repeat Offender" based on track record,
which can be counted against it in future case filings and consideration.

Interesting reading.  The ALAC (and possibly the GAC) may want to make a
case (jointly or separately) for third party reporting when comments are
called for.  At the moment, this is a draft for consideration based on
discussions in Durban by the relevant parties, but it would be good to keep
an eye on its progress.

Best regards,

Rinalia

** **

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)