[PC-NCSG] [] Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in Beijing 10 April 2013 at 07:15 UTC (15:15 Local time)

Mon Apr 1 20:21:56 EEST 2013

Just catching up here.

I definitely support proposing a discussion exploring the problem of GNSO
processes being undermined.  And I'm leaning toward proposing a motion or
formal letter, even though it will not likely succeed, as a matter of
principle.  What do we have to lose?

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:05 AM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

>  Suggest either motion or formal letter - perhaps making a more general
> point about undermining GNSO processes and give examples, e.g. TMCH etc. If
> motion, need support from elsewhere and if passed, needs to be sure it gets
> passed on to Board as matter of urgency and not just published on web and
> minutes.
>
>  If neither, then a conversation certainly at minimum, for us and other
> groups e.g. contracted parties to bring up to Board at F2F meetings.
>
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Faculty Chair, Global IP Partnerships
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
> Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
>
>
> >>>
>
> *From: *
>
> joy <joy at apc.org>
>
> *To:*
>
> Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>
> *CC:*
>
> <pc-ncsg at ipjustice.org>
>
> *Date: *
>
> 3/31/2013 9:27 PM
>
> *Subject: *
>
> Re: [PC-NCSG] [] Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in
> Beijing 10 April 2013 at 07:15 UTC (15:15 Local time)
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----
>
> Hash: SHA1
>
> indeed rafik, indeed :-)
>
> On 1/04/2013 2:15 p.m., Rafik Dammak wrote:
> >
> > Rafik Dammak @rafik "fight for the users"
> >
> > Hi Joy,
> >
> > On 1/04/2013 5:37 a.m., Wendy Seltzer wrote:
> >> We have until Tuesday, April 2, to make motions. We can also
> >> request items for discussion even if we don't have motions on
> >> the table. We might work with Jeff and others to propose a motion
> >> on the privacy/proxy "accreditation," or might better wait for
> >> more conversations (not sure).
> >>
> >> I'd suggest we at least propose a conversation about the matters
> >> of bottom-up versus top-down policy-making, and how the Council
> >> can take a leadership role in bringing issues up from the
> >> bottom.
> > JL: good idea - we need to call out the IPC for constantly
> > undermining the Council - why will noone talk about this? I think
> > we also need to inject a rule of law thread to this ie that policy
> > should stand once it is set until it is re-set through proper
> > process. happy to support this.
> >
> >
> > we can remind them the costa rica tragicomedy about the "fall of
> > GNSO" when we deferred the motion about IOC , maybe we are in that
> > situation thanks to those who blamed us in that time
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> >>
> >> Do we want to propose a motion that ICANN should extend the
> >> current RAA to new gTLDs until the GNSO adopts a consensus
> >> supporting the policy changes in any proposed new RAA?
> > JL: Also happy with this - if the Registrars do not support it,
> > let them be on record for that. happy to help with drafting it.
> >>
> >> A motion of censure on TMCH "strawman" adoption?
> >>
> >> Propose a long-term planning committee?
> >>
> >> Discussion of recommendations to nom-comm on what they should do
> >> with their appointees to GNSO Council?
> >>
> >> --Wendy
> >>
> >> On 03/31/2013 12:19 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
> >>> Reminder:  It is the responsibility of the GNSO
> >>> Representatives to actively advance the policy positions of the
> >>> membership on the GNSO Council.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, Robin
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 31, 2013, at 8:05 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> How many issues has NCSG submitted motions for?
> >>>>
> >>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>> On 31 Mar 2013, at 10:35, Robin Gross wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Not much meat on this council agenda.  Where are all the
> >>>>> weighty issues that are tying ICANN into knots?
> >>>>> Shouldn't some of them be on the council's agenda for
> >>>>> discussion at least?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Robin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org
> > <mailto:Glen at icann.org>> Date: March 31,
> >>>>>> 2013 6:41:28 AM PDT To: liaison6c
> >>>>>> <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org
> >>>>>> <mailto:liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>>
> > Subject: [liaison6c] Proposed
> >>>>>> Agenda for the GNSO Council Public Meeting in Beijing 10
> >>>>>> April 2013 at 07:15 UTC (15:15 Local time)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear All, Please find the proposed Agenda for the GNSO
> >>>>>> Council Public Meeting in Beijing 10 April 2013 at 07:15
> >>>>>> UTC (15:15 Local time).
> >>>>>> http://beijing46.icann.org/node/37155 The agenda is also
> >>>>>> published on the Wiki at:
> >>>>>>
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+10+April+2013
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > Motions may be viewed at:
> >>>>>>
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+April+2013
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > http://beijing46.icann.org/node/37155
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This agenda was established according to the GNSO
> >>>>>> Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012
> >>>>>> for the GNSO Council and updated. http://
> >>>>>>
> > gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf
> > <
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf>
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > For convenience:
> >>>>>> ? An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting
> >>>>>> thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this
> >>>>>> agenda. ? An excerpt from the Council Operating
> >>>>>> Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is
> >>>>>> provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting
> >>>>>> Times 07:15 UTC http://tinyurl.com/cu3adns Coordinated
> >>>>>> Universal Time 07:15 UTC 00:15 Los Angeles; 03:15
> >>>>>> Washington; 08:15 London; 09:15 Paris; 19:15 Wellington
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council
> >>>>>> members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat
> >>>>>> in advance if a dial out call is needed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 15:15 - 17:30 Council Public Forum
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Presentations by Stakeholder Groups and Constituency
> >>>>>> Leaders (60 minutes)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ? Registries Stakeholder Group ? Keith Drazek ?
> >>>>>> Registrars Stakeholder Group ? Matt Serlin ? Non
> >>>>>> Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) ? Bill Drake ? Non
> >>>>>> Commercial Stakeholders Constituency ? Robin Gross ?
> >>>>>> Not-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency ? Alain
> >>>>>> Berranger. ? Commercial and Business Users Constituency
> >>>>>> (BC) ? Elisa Cooper ? Intellectual Property Constituency
> >>>>>> (IPC) ? Kristina Rosette ? Internet Service Providers
> >>>>>> and Connectivity Providers  (ISPCP) ? Tony Holmes Break
> >>>>>> (10 minutes) Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
> >>>>>> 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3
> >>>>>> Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for
> >>>>>> the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating
> >>>>>> Procedures: Draft Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 14
> >>>>>> March 2013 approved on 30 March 2013.
> >>>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg14383.html
> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > 1.5. GNSO Projects List
> >>>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf ?
> >>>>>> Review main changes. ? Comments and/or questions.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (10 minutes) Review
> >>>>>> focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes /
> >>>>>> topics Include brief review of Projects List and Action
> >>>>>> List
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 3: Consent agenda ([0] minutes) TBC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 4: MOTION - Initiation of a Policy Development
> >>>>>> Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of
> >>>>>> Contact Information (10 minutes) A Final Issue Report
> >>>>>> translation and transliteration of contact information
> >>>>>> was submitted to the GNSO Council on 21 March 2013 (see
> >>>>>> http://gnso.icann.org/en/library). The Final Issue
> >>>>>> Report recommends that the GNSO Council should initiate a
> >>>>>> Policy Development Process (PDP) limited to the issues
> >>>>>> discussed in this report but delay the next steps in the
> >>>>>> PDP until the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory
> >>>>>> Services completes its recommendations, in May 2013 with
> >>>>>> a possible extension, in order to ensure that the
> >>>>>> resulting policy recommendations would be consistent with
> >>>>>> any new model or approaches to contact data that may
> >>>>>> result from the Expert Working Group?s deliberations;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As recommended by the WHOIS Policy Review Team the Final
> >>>>>> Issue Report also recommends that ICANN should commission
> >>>>>> a study on the commercial feasibility of translation or
> >>>>>> transliteration systems for internationalized contact
> >>>>>> data, which is expected to help inform the PDP Working
> >>>>>> Group in its deliberations;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ICANN?s General Counsel has confirmed that the topic is
> >>>>>> properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process
> >>>>>> and within the scope of the GNSO.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Link to motion
> >>>>>>
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+April+2013
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > 4.1 Reading of the motion ().
> >>>>>> 4.2 Discussion of motion and next steps. 4.3 Vote. Item
> >>>>>> 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Policy vs. Implementation (15
> >>>>>> minutes) Recent issues highlight an ongoing broader
> >>>>>> issue regarding the boundary between policy development
> >>>>>> and implementation work as well as the effective
> >>>>>> integration of policy development and integration work
> >>>>>> from the outset.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In addition, the Council is increasingly asked to
> >>>>>> consider issues for policy guidance and may well need to
> >>>>>> look at the evolution of its own work and processes to
> >>>>>> accommodate this type of request.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ICANN Staff published a paper intended to facilitate
> >>>>>> further community discussions on this topic. Discussions
> >>>>>> on the Council mailing list and at subsequent meetings
> >>>>>> indicate that this is an area of fundamental interest to
> >>>>>> the Council.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Following further community discussion in Beijing the
> >>>>>> Council is to discuss the current position and to
> >>>>>> consider next steps from a GNSO Council perspective.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 5.1 Discussion 5.2 Next steps
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Template to request an
> >>>>>> Issues Report (10 minutes)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One outcome from the Operations and Organisation meeting
> >>>>>> that GNSO Council Leadership held with ICANN staff in
> >>>>>> Amsterdam earlier this year, was to develop an online
> >>>>>> template to complete the request for an Issue Report.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The objective of this tool is to encourage requestors to
> >>>>>> gather as much information as possible and engage in
> >>>>>> early discussions with others prior to submitting a
> >>>>>> request for an Issue Report. The intended outcome is that
> >>>>>> by encouraging completion of all the information
> >>>>>> requested in the template, it will be possible to
> >>>>>> identify what information may still be needed and
> >>>>>> encourage collaboration between different interested
> >>>>>> parties at an early stage.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The template (https://community.icann.org/x/GQllAg) can
> >>>>>> be completed by either by following the instructions or
> >>>>>> by downloading the word template from the same page.
> >>>>>> Once completed, Council members will be able to either
> >>>>>> create a PDF and submit that together with a motion to
> >>>>>> the Council mailing list, or insert the relevant wiki
> >>>>>> link in the motion. Please note that this template is
> >>>>>> tailored to requests for Issue Reports as defined in the
> >>>>>> PDP Manual. The template is still in draft form and the
> >>>>>> Council is to discuss its usefulness, consider accepting
> >>>>>> it for future issue reports and consider also where
> >>>>>> similar templates could be used elsewhere.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 6.1 ? Discussion 6.2 ? Next steps
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Outcomes from sessions in
> >>>>>> Beijing (15 minutes) A series of main session meetings
> >>>>>> will have taken place as well as meetings between the
> >>>>>> Council and other key stakeholders.  This item represents
> >>>>>> an opportunity to capture and review any key outcomes or
> >>>>>> actions arising from those meetings.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 7.1 ? Discussion 7.2 ? Next steps
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Item 8:  Any Other Business (5 minutes)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Open Microphone Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting
> >>>>>> Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except
> >>>>>> as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto,
> >>>>>> or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold
> >>>>>> to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action
> >>>>>> requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting
> >>>>>> thresholds described below shall apply to the following
> >>>>>> GNSO actions: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an
> >>>>>> affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of
> >>>>>> each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy
> >>>>>> Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in
> >>>>>> Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than
> >>>>>> one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds
> >>>>>> (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope:
> >>>>>> requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d.
> >>>>>> Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope:
> >>>>>> requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3)
> >>>>>> of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
> >>>>>> e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope:
> >>>>>> requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f.
> >>>>>> Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team
> >>>>>> Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council
> >>>>>> may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple
> >>>>>> majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once
> >>>>>> initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final
> >>>>>> Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for
> >>>>>> significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO
> >>>>>> Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. Approve a
> >>>>>> PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority:
> >>>>>> requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House
> >>>>>> and further requires that one GNSO Council member
> >>>>>> representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups
> >>>>>> supports the Recommendation. i. Approve a PDP
> >>>>>> Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
> >>>>>> affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. Approve a
> >>>>>> PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain
> >>>>>> Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision
> >>>>>> specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council"
> >>>>>> demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO
> >>>>>> Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or
> >>>>>> exceeded. k. Modification of Approved PDP
> >>>>>> Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN
> >>>>>> Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or
> >>>>>> amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority
> >>>>>> vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a)
> >>>>>> two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or
> >>>>>> (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of
> >>>>>> the other House." Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures
> >>>>>> (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4) 4.4.1 Applicability
> >>>>>> Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited
> >>>>>> number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a
> >>>>>> Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP
> >>>>>> recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO
> >>>>>> Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a
> >>>>>> Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee
> >>>>>> ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the
> >>>>>> announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the
> >>>>>> meeting?s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances,
> >>>>>> announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce
> >>>>>> this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar
> >>>>>> days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by
> >>>>>> all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will
> >>>>>> administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes
> >>>>>> according to these procedures and will provide reasonable
> >>>>>> means for transmitting and authenticating absentee
> >>>>>> ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e-
> >>>>>> mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may
> >>>>>> become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not
> >>>>>> affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for
> >>>>>> the meeting in which the vote is initiated.)
> >>>>>>
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN
> > hemisphere
> >>>>>>
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 07:15
> >>>>>>
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 00:15
> >>>>>> New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 03:15 Rio
> >>>>>> de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 04:15 Montevideo,
> >>>>>> Uruguay (UYST) UTC-3+1DST 04:15 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST)
> >>>>>> UTC+0DST 08:15 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST
> >>>>>> 08:15 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT) UTC+1+0DST 08:15 Bonn, Germany
> >>>>>> (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 09:15 Stockholm, Sweden (CET)
> >>>>>> UTC+1+0DST 09:15 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST) UTC+2+0DST
> >>>>>> 10:15 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT ) UTC+5+0DST 12:15
> >>>>>> Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 15:15 Perth,
> >>>>>> Australia (WST) UTC+8+0DST 15:15 Wellington, New Zealand
> >>>>>> (NZDT ) UTC+12+1DST 19:15
> >>>>>>
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2013, 2:00 or 3:00
> >>>>>> local time (with exceptions)
> >>>>>>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> > For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com
> >>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/cu3adns
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint G?ry GNSO
> >>>>>> Secretariat gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
> > <mailto:gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org>
> >>>>>> http://gnso.icann.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight
> >>>>> Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA p: +1-415-553-6261
> > <tel:%2B1-415-553-6261>
> >>>>> f: +1-415-462-6451 <tel:%2B1-415-462-6451> w:
> > http://www.ipjustice.org     e:
> >>>>> robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG
> >>>>> mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >>>>> <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG
> >>>> mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >>>> <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street,
> >>> San Francisco, CA  94117  USA p: +1-415-553-6261
> > <tel:%2B1-415-553-6261>    f:
> >>> +1-415-462-6451 <tel:%2B1-415-462-6451> w:
> > http://www.ipjustice.org     e:
> >>> robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG
> >>> mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >>> <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> >
> > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRWNyLAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqrbQIALGbV/EouGzwsMc8xXZ9pWfd
> > kL51Dj8Ed442lJTVEVwWgmFXsj+WDRVZ43Y3WEgZvI6SHOnVgeXJLNPGPWMV2fEI
> > hHnig8tOwTpeph0gLpeCjo8549g0FmIop4iss3g78X0tDiMFprYnrQLgNMVQn2/j
> > 8y6Mf77nMB9r1ct0QUD6pFTolTEUfRZhhmqthND/tR0w2r1skqjV3XserIU8KHZZ
> > W8jMPLrPAc9/Ne/fohDIAvUNVU0jsKdKx0g9K8a2O0wphWX0VCBMH1qUED61Gucq
> > d0gZ7WblUAdptoHlD35mRkd2Md4+r8Ne9qk/iV/WAAvKfWZhoJ1ZISvH9J/NuOo=
> > =Xx+w -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
> > list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
> >
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRWOJBAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqL20H/i1SV1G3MfkuoUP8YrPUvVsY
> g+DLrGJO5QZffn/wizDlQQ0B0h7g5CNNs+I0gxVUnlMgmQ+BlHzEESBDhsaX8xeu
> qjkhvp8fIvfm3aWL9qGLOzA1pidOIpTSRVkOtBkR73nXTYs83uKVGgnSw/VoHFo5
> M7ITZDLSsTMhMjjRqN//8FNji+cIEBhSlgWvvp5lRnnNdhaHk6XgYm0YLijh4hAH
> lynpBQ/SKf2tY+uh+1bq5rDPYq1Wi9kW7TY34e5gMSsSJ+Sm2ad9qXGjEVT3yQfG
> yvnIL7iLnpPGGSwdsBvUPJ1vW0DhUhD19k8aWurOyi2Twg+Z22gut8oP2sb5iNY=
> =x6Kr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130401/e479721e/attachment-0001.html>