Robin,
Thanks for the detailed background.  It is great for the constituency  and 
for the noncommercial community that you have such a good handle on what is  
happening and what needs to be done.
 
One thing you wrote below particularly resonates.  Why bother to pass  a 
treaty when you can get ICANN to make global (and let me add biased,  one-sided, 
and pro-IP) policy?  That's exactly where the UDRP comes from,  and other ICANN 
initiatives.  Would that ICANN could stay solely in the  business of the 
technical and away from freedom of expression/intellectual  property matters, but 
it won't.
 
Thanks again for leading our response to this IPC proposal.  I know  
understand why you take it so seriously.
Best,
Kathy
 
Robin wrote: 


One  thing is clear: ICANN is the ideal forum for these causes that can't 
win  approval in a legitimate international treaty context.   Why bother  
with the difficulties of passing a treaty when one can easily get ICANN  
to make global policy?







**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)