<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
- To: "Sarah Deutsch " <sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mike O'Connor " <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>, "DFares@xxxxxxxxxxxx " <DFares@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
- From: "Marilyn Cade " <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:09:51 +0000
Excellent!
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: Deutsch Sarah B <sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:42:52
To: <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>; <DFares@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>; <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>; <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>;
<bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
Sounds good to me as well and it should address the original concern that led
to this proposed language.
Sarah
Sarah B. Deutsch
Vice President & Associate General Counsel
Verizon Communications
Phone: 703-351-3044
Fax: 703-351-3670
sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx
----------------
From: Mike O'Connor [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 11:04 AM
To: Fares, David
Cc: Zahid Jamil; Deutsch, Sarah B; 'Marilyn Cade'; 'Philip Sheppard'; 'bc -
GNSO list'
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
i'm with David on this one. His sentence seems like what we need, instead of
all the prose;
"When a member is representing the BC, they should remain faithful to approved
BC positions"
end of story.
mikey
On Oct 27, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Fares, David wrote:
Colleagues,
I am still working through the Charter. Regarding solidarity though, I suggest
that we rephrase the language to ensure that when a member is representing the
BC that they are faithful to approved BC positions.. I am not sure that we
need the more in-depth language.
Thanks,
David
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Zahid Jamil
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:54 PM
To: 'Deutsch, Sarah B'; 'Marilyn Cade'; 'Philip Sheppard'; 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
I would like to propose some alternative language in regards the following:
7.5. Solidarity
Whenever a member speaks publicly within or to the ICANN community meetings and
indicates to others that they are a Constituency member, it is likely that
their view, statement or conduct may be interpreted by the ICANN community to
be a Constituency approved position. As such, members are expected, when
communicating on such occasions to ensure that their statement(s) and conduct
do not undermine, prejudice or detract from an approved Constituency
position(s). This will not affect a member's right to communicate their own
view, if distinct from an approved Constituency position(s) by clarifying that
such a statement may differ from and does not reflect the approved Constituency
position. Members of the Executive Committee are required to support approved
constituency positions at all times. Both Members and Executive Committee
Members may communicate dissent to a Constituency position providing they make
it clear they are communicating in their personal capacity.
10. Privacy of personal data
The Executive Committee, Secretariat, committees and members of the
Constituency will ensure privacy of member's and/or their representatives'
personal or personally identifiable data, and in particular shall not deal with
such data in a manner beyond what is necessary for the purposes for which it
was originally collected. Members may also decide to make such additional
aspects of their data available for disclosure and may consent to any such
disclosure by waiving such privacy requirements.
[Maybe we could list/identify what sort of data we are targeting even if don't
necessarily put it into the draft it may help with explaining to all us members
what we mean.]
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/>
Notice / Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by
mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the
intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute
privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The
reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever
of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by
electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use
of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil &
Jamil is prohibited.
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Deutsch, Sarah B
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 2:43 AM
To: Marilyn Cade; Philip Sheppard; bc - GNSO list
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
I concur that the idea of a one year term should be given serious
consideration. The IPC has followed this model and it works well.
I see that the overly broad "solidarity" language still remains in the
draft. Despite suggestions to try to figure how how more accurately the
language to situations where members are speaking publicly to the ICANN
community, the language remains unchanged. As Marilyn notes correctly below,
instead of drafting solidarity language that actually explains what the problem
is and how to implement it in a narrow manner, the draft goes in the opposite
direction by allowing executive committee members a carve out from BC positions
when they speak in their personal capacity. If anyone has an obligation to
adhere to the "solidarity" principle without the opportunity to give mixed
messages publicly or privately, it should be executive committee members.
Finally, I note that the troubling privacy language remains in the draft
unchanged. No one has answered the fundamental question of whether ordinary BC
members will be gaining access to personally identifiable or sensitive personal
information (and what information that is) and how ordinary BC members are
allegedly "processing" such information. Other BC members can weigh in, but we
do not want to have any access to sensitive personal information as part of our
BC membership. As mentioned earlier, requiring compliance with "prevailing
privacy laws" is meaningless since such laws differ signficantly depending on
jurisdiction. At a minimum ONLY the Secretariat and Exec Committee Members
should be subject to this language assuming they may have access to sensitive
personal information.
Sarah
Sarah B. Deutsch
Vice President & Associate General Counsel
Verizon Communications
Phone: 703-351-3044
Fax: 703-351-3670
sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx>
----------------
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf
Of Marilyn Cade
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 1:25 AM
To: Philip Sheppard; bc - GNSO list
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
Philip, thanks.
a few initial comments, and then I'll read through again and flag any areas for
the BC members of concern to me.
I appreciate that you have now been able to incorporate some of my comments in
this version.
However, I had asked to have a specially designated elected member as the
primary CSG rep, and I'd like that added into the list of elected positions.
There seems clear merit to distributing work, and avoiding conflicts of
interests by putting too many roles into a single party, or small number of
individuals. Spreading work, makes lighter work loads, as we all know. It does
mean that coordination are important, of course.
A change that I feel strongly about is that the officers should have only one
year terms, with a term limit of no more than three yaers. That is what the
IPC does, and it seems prudent to move to one year terms.
In 4.8, we need to make the description consistent within the body of the
section to secretariat services, rather than continue to use the term
"Secretariat", since the members haven't supported a continuation of a retained
position, and the approach being proposed will allow flexibility to either use
contracted services or services from ICANN.
I see that this now proposes that executive committee members need not adhere
to the BC position. This goes too far. If one is an elected officer, then one
has a duty to adhere to the BC position. Can we discuss when you would envision
an executive committee member 'acting in their individual capacity'? That might
clear up the confusion for me on that one.
I see that this charter is continuing to propose a list administrator. I'm not
sure that is a separate function from 'secretariat services'. We want to avoid
creating someone who is the 'email police', who has to make judgements about
other members communications; I don't see that function in other constituencies
-- and suggest that we simply have principled approaches to efficient
communications.
We can briefly discuss the CSG representative at the huddle this p.m.
Marilyn
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:27:20 +0100
> Subject: [bc-gnso] BC charter v19
> From: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx <mailto:philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
> To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> I attach the latest version for discussion.
> I believe we are nearly there.
> It factors in the majority of clarifying redrafts that have been suggested
> with the exception of redrafts that replaced current charter text that was
> to date unaltered.
>
> I will pull out those few remaining bigger changes that have been proposed
> for discussion at the BC meeting in Seoul.
>
> Philip
>
This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential
information. It is intended solely for the named addressee. If you are not the
addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message
to the addressee), you may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments
to anyone. Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its
attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any content of this
message and its attachments that does not relate to the official business of
News America Incorporated or its subsidiaries must be taken not to have been
sent or endorsed by any of them. No representation is made that this email or
its attachments are without defect.
- - - - - - - - -
phone 651-647-6109
fax 866-280-2356
web www.haven2.com <http://www.haven2.com>
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|