[nc-udrp] Re: UDRP Questionnaire

["J.Scott Evans" <jse@adamspat.com>]

Katrina:

Once again you are my heroine.  Thank you. I suppose I could have been as 
resourceful as you.  Does your boss know just how good you are!!! 

jse 

Katrina Burchell writes: 

>   
> 
> here is a copy of my response to the questionnaire which I saved (together
> with my answers) in case it is of any use.  It shows all 56 questions 
> 
> Katrina 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Chicoine, Caroline G. [SMTP:CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, February 27, 2002 3:49 PM
> To:	'Dinwoodie, Graeme'; Chicoine, Caroline G.; 'DNSO Secretariat'; 'Louis
> Touton'
> Cc:	'nc-udrp@dnso.org'
> Subject:	RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
>      
> I have sent another reminder to the secretariat that we desperately need
> this.  I asked the Secretariat to forward it directly to nc-udrp@dnso.org.
>  Obviously in light of this delay, I cannot expect people to complete
> their responses by Feb 28th.  Once it is distributed, I will post a new
> deadline.  
>   
> While I have a hardcopy, anyone who kept a digital version, if they could
> forward to nc-udrp@dnso.org, it would be greatly appreciated. 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dinwoodie, Graeme [mailto:GDinwoodie@kentlaw.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:24 PM
> To: 'Chicoine, Caroline G.'; 'DNSO Secretariat'; 'Louis Touton'
> Cc: 'nc-udrp@dnso.org'
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
>  
> 
> Caroline, 
> Forgive me if I've missed it, but do we have the link to the
> questionnaire?  I'm working on the basis of my own shorthand recollection
> of the questions, but it would be useful to see the actual document to
> which responses were made.  Thanks 
> Graeme 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Chicoine, Caroline G. [mailto:CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:05 PM 
> To: 'DNSO Secretariat'; 'Louis Touton' 
> Cc: 'nc-udrp@dnso.org' 
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> Importance: High 
> 
> I have given our Task Force members a Feb 28th deadline to review the 
> responses from the DNSO version questionnaire, but they can no longer find
> a 
> link to the questionnaire to compare the responses against.  Can you
> please 
> provide us a link asap. 
> Louis, since we do not have the ICANN responses yet, it is not as urgent, 
> but we will need a link to the ICANN version also at some point. 
> Thanks 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Chicoine, Caroline G.
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:58 AM 
> To: 'DNSO Secretariat'; 'Louis Touton' 
> Cc: 'MSD@tzmm.com' 
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
> Glen and Louis, can you email the link where are Task Force members can
> find 
> each version?  Thanks 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: MSD@tzmm.com [mailto:MSD@tzmm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:47 AM 
> To: CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com 
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
> Where can we find a copy of the questionnaire?  The results are all
> answers, 
> without the questions. 
> Best regards. 
> M. Scott Donahey 
> Tomlinson Zisko Morosoli & Maser LLP 
> 200 Page Mill Rd. 
> Palo Alto, CA  94306 
> Phone:  (650) 325-8666 
> Fax:      (650) 324-1808 
> msd@tzmm.com 
> www.tzmm.com 
>                 "This email message is for the sole use of the intended 
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any 
> unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If
> you 
> are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
> and 
> destroy all copies of the original message." 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com [mailto:CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:20 AM 
> To: Katrina.Burchell@unilever.com; nc-udrp@dnso.org 
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
> I thought long and hard about that, but decided not to put any
> constraints. 
> I would like everyone's comments to be in a summary fashion that
> highlights 
> the good, the bad and the suggestions, trying to be as concise as
> possible. 
> Once we see everyone's summaries, and once we do the same exercise with
> the 
> ICANN responses, we can discuss the summaries and see if we can put
> together 
> a report that represents some sort of consensus. 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Katrina Burchell [mailto:Katrina.Burchell@unilever.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 10:57 AM 
> To: nc-udrp@dnso.org 
> Subject: RE: [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> 
> Hi 
> Is there any format in which you want our review of the responses for 
> which we are responsible posted? 
> regards 
> Katrina 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From:   Chicoine, Caroline G. [SMTP:CCHICOINE@thompsoncoburn.com] 
> Sent:   Thursday, February 14, 2002 12:20 AM 
> To:     'nc-udrp@dnso.org' 
> Cc:     'Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us'; 'DNSO Secretariat' 
> Subject:        [nc-udrp] RE: UDRP Questionnaire 
> Importance:     High 
> We are ready to distribute the response we received to the questionnaire 
> from the DNSO website.  The responses from the ICANN website will follow
> in 
> due course. 
> To begin with, there the following four individuals apparently did not 
> receive or respond to my email to confirm that they are in fact receiving 
> email at the nc_udrp@dnso.org email address: 
> 
> gTLD Constituency rep - Jeff Neuman 
> CPR Provider - F. Peter Phillips 
> eResolution Provider - Dr. Joelle Thibault 
> WIPO Provider - Erik Wilbers 
> 
> Jeff, since I received an email from you recently, I am asking the 
> secretariat to confirm that the above email is the email we have of record 
> in our nc-udrp@dnso.org email distribution list.  If you would like us to 
> use a different email address, please let us know ASAP. 
> For the others, can their respective panelists try to contact their 
> providers to get a hold of these individuals? 
> In total, except for the three Providers mentioned above, we have 21 
> members 
> to review the attached responses. All responses per question can be found 
> at 
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/udrp1.txt 
> Each individual response per questionnaire can be found at 
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/udrp2.txt 
> While everyone can look at all the responses in whatever format they want, 
> your minimum responsibility is to review the number of the responses from 
> the second link that are assigned to you as set forth below (the number of 
> the response is identified at the top of the record by ##<actual number of 
> response>###########################): 
> 
> Sarah Deutsch #1-8 
> Neil Duncan Dundas #9-16 
> Jeff Neuman #17-24 
> J. Scott Evans #25-32 
> Antonio Harris #33-40 
> Michael Froomkin #41-48 
> Michael Palage #49-56 
> Katrina Burchell #57-65 
> M. Scott Donahey #66-73 
> F. Peter Phillips NONE 
> Ethan Katsh #74-81 
> Dr. Joelle Thibault NONE 
> James A. Carmody #82-89 
> Tim Cole #90-98 
> John Berryhill #99-107 
> Maxim Waldbaum #108-115 
> Erik Wilbers NONE 
> Dan Steinberg #116-123 
> Joon Hyung Hong #124-131 
> Graeme Dinwoodie #132-140 
> Erick Iriarte Ahon #141-148 
> Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah #149-155 
> I would like everyone to review their responses and provide a summary of 
> their findings within two weeks if possible, which would put us at Feb 
> 28th. 
> Please advise Milton or I if you believe you cannot meet this deadline so 
> we 
> can either reassign or take on some ourselves.