IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights PDP WG Phil Corwin, WG Co-Chair | ICANN-52 | February 2015

| 2 WG Progress since ICANN51  Preliminary decision to exclude INGOs from further consideration:  SG/C/SO/AC (including GAC) input sought  Responses received from SSAC, IPC & ISPCP so far  Currently discussing “standing” to file complaint under a dispute resolution proceeding (whether UDRP, URS or other):  Reviewed existing treaty scope and implementation in selected jurisdictions (e.g. USA, Australia)  “Thought exercise”: prior draft of alternative DRP, alternative wording to UDRP  IGO coalition’s input sought on standing & sovereign immunity  Response received 23 January, being discussed by WG

| 3 GAC Communique – ICANN51  The GAC Communique from ICANN51 in LA advised the ICANN Board that:  The UDRP (and URS) should not be amended  Curative Rights Protection Mechanism(s) should be at no or nominal cost to IGOs  Mason Cole, at the request of the WG and in his role as GNSO-GAC liaison, is facilitating dialogue between the GAC and the WG

| 4 Next Steps  WG face-to-face meeting on 13 February  Conclude discussion on standing  Commence work on sovereign immunity issue  Input expected from the GAC after ICANN52  In addition to questions posed by WG, potential issue may arise w.r.t. GAC’s IGO List not being limited to IGOs protected by the Paris Convention  Aim to produce preliminary recommendations by ICANN53

Thank you and Background

| 6 Background on the PDP WG Charter approved by GNSO Council in June 2014 –Whether existing curative rights mechanisms (UDRP & URS) should be modified to address specific needs of IGOs and INGOs; and if so, how; or –Whether new, narrowly tailored dispute resolution procedure modeled on UDRP/URS should be developed PDP originated in consensus recommendation by prior IGO-INGO PDP Working Group – Consensus recommendations adopted by GNSO Council in Nov 2013 –Issue Report published in March 2014