Page History

PROPOSED AGENDA

1. Agenda Bash, SOI updates

2. Substantive deliberations on remaining key topics of the URS (Sections

J - N)

a. Language
b. Abuse of Process
c. Education and Training
d. URS Providers
e. Data collection & analysis

3. Next steps - report to the full WG, substantive deliberations to follow at WG level consolidating all Sub Team recommendations and suggestions
4. AoB

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:

                                                               i.      attached, - Consolidated URS Discussion Document - updated 23 31 July 2018v1.docx

                                                             ii.      attached, - Staff compilation report - updated URS data_v1.1 - 9 July 2018.docx

1. Claims Denied – refer to email sent by Mary: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-documents/2018-July/000059.html

                                                           iii.      attached, - Staff table on Claims Denied cases
- Staff table on De Novo Review cases
- Responses & Notes - URS Provider Questions (15 June 2018) - Responses.pdf                                                           iv.      attached,
- URS Practitioners Survey Summary Results (12 June 2018.pdf

1. Next steps - report to the full WG, coordinate with the other Sub Teams as necessary
2. AoB

)

UPDATED:

Consolidated URS Discussion Document - updated 31 July 2018v2.docx (updated following the Sub Team call of 31 July)

Staff Table on Claims Denied Analysis v3 (updated following completion of case review by ICANN staff, 28 August)BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

Mp3

Adobe Connect Recording

**31 July 2018 - Providers and Practitioners Sub Teams will join this meeting**

Attendance & AC Chat

Apologies: noneArriving late: David McAuley

Notes/ Action Items

ACTION ITEMS:

• Staff to update discussion document to reflect latest Sub Team deliberations and recommendations (DONE – see attached)
• Brian to work with staff to prepare update/report for full Working Group call tomorrow (Wednesday), with focus on the Sub Team’s findings and recommendations (IN PROCESS)
• Staff to review the cases coded by Rebecca as indicating possible language issues, and report to the Sub Team about any policy issue identified as a result (IN PROCESS)

RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Section J: Language - Develop guidance for Examiners to assist with their decision as to what language to use in going forward with a URS proceeding and Determination
• Section L: Education & Training - Develop a multilingual basic FAQ (for both complainants and respondents) that can grow over time

NOTES & DISCUSSION:

1. Section J (Language)

- Two types of issues: notice to Respondent, and notice to registries/registrars

- A few cases have noted that respondents may have an issue with the language (of the Examiner? Proceedings/Determination?) - refer to Rebecca's spreadsheet for the cases

- Petter (as panelist) has seen cases where the response was provided in English, but not necessarily fully conversant.

- RECOMMENDATION: provide some guidelines for Examiners to look at, in deciding which language to use for the Determination when the respondent's main language does not appear to be English

- On FORUM report of language: Renee confirms that it is a regular report to ICANN that just lists the languages used during the reporting period.

- Staff to look at the cases noted by Rebecca's research to see if any substantive issues can be identified.

2. Section K: Abuse of Process

- FORUM looked at 20 cases where respondent alleged abuse of process by Complainant, but none found (overall, no cases of abuse have been found, based on the current URS provisions)

- Respondents may make the allegation but while it may be noted by the Examiner, the Examiner may not specifically note that no abuse was found

- See what (if any) recommendations or issues are highlighted by the other two Sub Teams

- No specific recommendation from Documents Sub Team based on available data

3. Section I: Education & Training

- The Providers' feedback has substantial information about this topic; some follow up being conducted by the Providers Sub Team

- Look to Providers Sub Team for specific issues/recommendations - could include development of a multilingual basic FAQ (for both complainants and respondents) that can grow over time

- Practitioners Sub Team may also have insights.

4. Section M: URS Providers

- Again, guidance here should mostly come from Providers Sub Team and perhaps the Practitioners Sub Team

5. Section N: Alternative Processes

- Added due to WG member suggestions; no specific data noted or reviewed by Documents Sub Team