Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW: BC comment on ICANN's focus for 5-year strategic plan

[Aparna Sridhar <aparnasridhar@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi David,

Google doesn't object to including a mention of the public interest.  I was
merely channeling the original text, which took that position, and
reframing it in a way that I thought was more clear.  I had assumed that it
was an established BC position to look skeptically at that language.  If
that's not the case, I am happy to have a broader discussion with the
group.

Cheers,

Aparna Sridhar
Counsel
Google Inc.
1101 New York Avenue N.W.
Second Floor
Washington, DC 20005
tel:  202.346.1261
e-mail: aparnasridhar@xxxxxxxxxx


On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Fares, David <DFares@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  Aparna,
>
>
>
> Thank you for sharing your comments.  21st Century Fox agrees that ICANN
> should focus on its narrow mandate related to Internet names and numbers.
> However, no matter how hard ICANN tries, its technical mandate will impact
> the public interest.  Indeed, this is one of the important reasons the GAC
> was formed, to ensure that ICANN’s technical work comports with public
> policies, including those that impact the public interest.  With this in
> mind, we do not support the deletion of references to the public interest
> but agree that ICANN should limit public interest matters to those that
> arise out of ICANN’s technical mandate for the name and numbering system.
>
>
>
> We are happy to discuss.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
>
>
> *From:* owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] *On
> Behalf Of *Aparna Sridhar
> *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2014 6:13 PM
> *To:* Marilyn Cade
> *Cc:* Steve Delbianco; bc - GNSO list; Chen, Tim; Chris at Andalucia
> *Subject:* Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW: BC comment on ICANN's focus for
> 5-year strategic plan
>
>
>
> All--
>
>
>
> Please see some suggested edits from Google on the attached document.
>  While there is some amount of reorganizing, I believe our suggested edits
> preserve the points made in the original document while making some
> improvements for flow and clarity.  I have also suggested deviation from
> ICANN's proposed submission form where adhering to it obscured the content
> of our comments.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Aparna
>
>
>   Aparna Sridhar
>
> Counsel
>
> Google Inc.
>
> 1101 New York Avenue N.W.
>
> Second Floor
>
> Washington, DC 20005
>
> tel:  202.346.1261
>
> e-mail: aparnasridhar@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>  I will draft something for ICANN mission/lingage to I-GOV. I wanted to
> hear from CCWG and 1NET first, and that happened this week.
>
>
>
> I also moved this to bc-private just temporarily.
>
>
>
> David, Aparna, Philip, and I were on CCWG and David, Aparna, and others
> from business COMMUNITY, were on relevant calls last week. I will send a
> short assessment over week end.
>
>
>
> If members want public access to our discussions, we can move back to
> public list, but I didn't want to do that, without full consideration from
> BC members.
>
>
>
> M
>  ------------------------------
>
> From: sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
> CC: tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW: BC comment on ICANN's focus for 5-year
> strategic plan
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 17:27:45 +0000
>
>
>
> Attached is the current draft BC comment on ICANN’s Vision, Mission &
> Focus for 5-year Strategic Plan, which came out of last summer’s
> "brainstorming" by board, community and staff. 
> (link<http://www.icann.org/en/about/planning/strategic-engagement/focus-areas-29oct13-en.pdf>
> )
>
>
>
> Tim Chen and Chris Chaplow led drafting of the BC comment, with help from
> Martin Sutton, Marilyn Cade, and Andrew Mack.
>
>
>
> Comments close 31-Jan, so today begins our 14-day review period.
>
>
>
> We need draft comments for Focus Area V: Defining role clarity for ICANN
> in the Internet governance ecosystem.
>
>  Yesterday I shared my views about ICANN limiting its mission and
> avoiding entanglements in the broader I-Gov debate.       If no BC members
> contribute text for Area V, then I can draft something next week.
>
>
>
> Please REPLY ALL with edits (TRACK CHANGES)as soon as possible, since the
> comment deadline is 31-Jan-2014.
>
>
>
> Thanks again to Tim and Chris for taking the lead on this.
>
>
>
> —
>
> Steve DelBianco
>
> Vice chair for policy coordination
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. 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.
>