Intellectual Property Constituency: Difference between revisions

Marie Cabural (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Marie Cabural (talk | contribs)
Line 31: Line 31:


==Position Statements on ICANN Policy Issues==
==Position Statements on ICANN Policy Issues==
The Intellectual Property Constituency always provide the position statements and the recommendations of its members for every ICANN policy issues. In 2010, IPC submitted its position papers regarding:
# The Procedure for Board Seat 13- IPC did not object on the timetable, however with regards to the subject matter on leaving the all the other issues related to the selection of Board Seat to be decided by the Contracted Party House, IPC requested a parity for the Non-contracted Party House. According to IPC, the Non-contracted Party House should also be allowed to decide how to fill Board seat 14 the following year and shouldn't be required to follow the strategy of the Contracted Party House for seat 13. The constituency emphasized that allowing each House to decide separately how to fill a seat on the ICANN Board is a positive improvement which paved the way to remove party dominance in a contrctual relationship with ICANN regarding GNSO's selection of board members. <ref>[http://ipconstituency.org/PDFs/2010_Feb18_Comments_on_procedure_for_Board_Seat_13.pdf GNSO Operating Procedures on the 2010 Selection Process for ICANN Board Seat 13]</ref> 
# Its Comments for ICANN on Expressions of Interest-
# Its Comments to the December 11, 2009 Recommendations of the Special Trademark Issues ("STI") Review Team


==References==
==References==