Page History

...

• Elimination of reasonable due process (#6.2.5, 6.2.9)
• Reducing standards of proof to not require "clear and convincing evidence" (#6.2.6)
• Elimination of a requirement of bad faith when determining URS action (#6.2.7)
• A "loser pays" regime (#6.2.8)
• Requirement of a separate rationale for filing of appeal (#6.2.10.1)
• Extend URS beyond exact matches (#6.2.13)Lowering standards of proof in

We also note specifically that the Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedures (Scorecard #6.3) was not the product of the STI community consensus, but a disgraced remnant of the IRT effort that was demonstrated to act counter to the public interest and against overall Internet domain stability. We strongly oppose the re-introduction of the PDDRP and ask the GAC to re-evaluate its consideration of the public good in this matter.

In regard to Consumer Protection measures as stated in Scorecard #6.4 (except for #6.4.4, see below), ALAC strongly agrees with the GAC positions (though we also agree with the "due care" response from the Board related to #6.4.2). At-Large has long indicated to ICANN a dissatisfaction with enforcement efforts, and re-enforces the sentiments behind #4.2.3.

...