[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[wg-b] STRONG disagreement
- To: wg-b@dnso.org
- Subject: [wg-b] STRONG disagreement
- From: Mikki Barry <ooblick@netpolicy.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:07:11 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <LPBBJDNHOGCMGILGPHKHAECCDHAA.joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
- References: <LPBBJDNHOGCMGILGPHKHAECCDHAA.joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
- Sender: owner-wg-b@dnso.org
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-wg-b@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-b@dnso.org]On Behalf Of
>Michael D. Palage
>Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 1:28 PM
>To: Wg-B@Dnso. Org
>Subject: [wg-b] WG-B Report
>
>
>I am trying to make sure that I get all the dissents incorporated into the
>Appendix of the report. The report will be posted shortly.
The "dissents" and the "report" have NOT been decided upon by this
working group. Likely, the IPC proposal is the "dissent" and the
"report" is that no action should be taken regarding famous marks.
As such, the IPC proposal is beyond the scope of this working group,
has not been properly prommulgated and commented by the working group
membership, and is NOT the report of the IPC.
This should NOT be in any way, shape or form handed out as a product
of this working group.