ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC

  • To: "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx " <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC
  • From: Phil Corwin <pcorwin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:22:50 -0400

Clearly, based upon what I sent earlier today, I disagree with Marilyn on this 

But, regardless of the substance, I have questions about the process followed 
on this matter. There is no way to determine whether there is sufficient 
consensus among BC members without first providing them with the draft GNSO 
letter as well as some analysis as to whether and how it is at odds with prior 
BC policy statements. Instead, it has been presumed up front that consensus 
does not exist and a BC position of abstention has been conveyed to the GNSO 
before the BC as a whole has had any opportunity to consider the matter. 

It may well be that no consensus exists and that a default position of 
abstention properly reflects that, but I think BC members should have some 
opportunity for input before a Constituency position is conveyed.

Philip S. Corwin 
Butera & Andrews 
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
Suite 500 
Washington, DC 20004

202-347-6875 (office) 

202-347-6876 (fax)

202-255-6172 (cell)

"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Marilyn Cade 
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 1:51 PM
To: Philip Sheppard ; bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx 
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC

I would support an abstention. First, positions like this deserve broader BC 
discussion, and as noted by Philip, there are items where there may not be 
membership consensus. 

Marilyn Cade
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>

Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 12:20:36 
To: <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC

 Driven by the Registrars, the Council is considering a letter to the GAC 
(draft attached) in
 response to the GAC letter to ICANN CEO.
 The Council response raises issues with which the BC may agree and others with 
which we may
 We have therefore indicated at this stage a BC abstention.
 The IPC has done the same.
 Do let me know if you have any views.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy