Page History

...

This constitutes support for the Board's postion on over 85% of the issues/.

NCSG Additional Comments on some supported items

1.) The NCSG did not agree with the Staff designated name for this REC6 issue: “Limited Public Interest Objections.” The Rec6 report indicated a strong support for calling these issues: Principles of International Law.  NCSG supports this name for the issue.  

...

6.1.2)  NCSG wishes to point out that the the GAC postion runs against the recommendations of the the GNSO, the IRT and the STI.

...

11.1) The NCSG shares the Board's concern about the various definitions of criminal behavior.

Replies that relate to several of the GAC issues, including: 2.2.5, 8.1.1.1, 8.1.4

While the NCSG has not taken a postion on whether the GAC should be exempt from paying the fee for making objection, the NCSG supports the following:

...

6.1.1) The NCSG points out that this goes back to scope defined in the IRT, which was rejected by the STI.  The GAC request, as well as the Board response are Board response, are unclear as to the scope of Intellectual Property and taken literally this would too broad.

6.2.3) The NCSG supports the recommendation made in the STI process: the respondent should be given the right to participate in selecting a panel.

6.2.5) Strong support in the NCSG for marking this as a 2, as this equates default with a presumption of guilt.

6.2.10.3) Strong support in the NCSG for marking this as a 2, as this equates default with a presumption of guilt.

6.2.12) There was a specific agreement in the STI that the URS would be limited to locking.  This critical difference from the UDRP was how the URS was originally framed.

...

11.4) Strong support in the NCSG for marking as a 2 because is 2 because it is outside of ICANN's scope.

...