[CRISP-TEAM] [CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] IPR Memo
Kivuva at transworldafrica.com
Mon Aug 10 22:06:26 CEST 2015
On Aug 10, 2015 8:53 PM, "Izumi Okutani" <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
> Thanks John, Bill, Mwendwa, Andrei, for expressing your views.
> This is really helpful reference for the coming calls suggested by the
CWG Chairs as CWG/CRISP/IANAPLAN Coordination Meeting.
> From the numbers, we have requested Alan and Paul Wilson to join us.
> I see all who have expressed opinion so far see Scenarios 1 and 2 are
incompatible, Scenario 1 as we exchange SLA with ICANN.
> We haven't heard concerns about Scenario 3, until this point expressed to
us directly nor through the ICG.
> I continue to welcome any other observations.
Just to clarify, and at the risk of reiterating what may have been said ...
To put everything into perspective, the consolidated ICG proposal has no
inconsistencies that have been observed. There is nothing we are required
to do, especially the CRISP team. No other operational community should
dictate what should or should not be in the proposal of another community.
For us to change anything, an inconsistency has to be in place. That would
require for example, one of the communities adding a clause in their
proposal with a position on the IPR issue that is inconsistent with the
numbering proposal. Then when that inconsistency is introduced, ICG would
request the two communities to reconcile. But at this stage, there is
nothing to reconcile
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CRISP