ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-improvem-impl-sc]


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

Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair Jonathan Robinson

  • To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair Jonathan Robinson
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:38:23 -0500

Hi,

In my response to the upcoming call notifications, which I can't attend,
I made the following remark that belongs here as opposed to there:

> i think it will get handled on list in any case.  We are close, 
> Mary's corrections on top of Greg's edits will probably take care of it.

Thanks

avri

On 23-Jan-15 18:00, Mary Wong wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The policy staff supporting the SCI thought it might be helpful to add
> what we hope are clarifying comments to the ongoing discussion, which
> relate to three of the four topics highlighted in the draft letter.
>
> - On #1 (Friendly Amendment to Motions), this is actually one of the
> potential topics for referral that the Council has temporarily put on
> hold following its last meeting on 15 January; see
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items.
> It is therefore a topic already on the Council’s radar as a possible
> topic for referral to the SCI; as such, we wonder if, for this
> paragraph, rather than recommending action the SCI may wish to request
> that the Council inform it (perhaps through the liaison) at the point
> when the Council takes up consideration of the issue again.
>
> - On #3 (Review of WG Consensus Levels), we note from the language of
> the October 2014 GNSO Council resolution (which passed the three
> latest SCI recommendations unanimously) that the Council had expressly
> agreed to consider the SCI’s request for a review of the Consensus
> Levels, and further expressly noted that this exercise may be
> conducted as part of “a broader exercise in reviewing all the GNSO
> Operating Procedures”:
> see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201410 – an exercise
> which the current draft letter lists as topic #4 (Review of GNSO
> Operating Procedures). 
>
> - In addition, the SCI has previously discussed (and staff had thought
> the SCI had agreed) that such a broad review should not occur
> independently of or without reference to the ongoing GNSO Review – at
> a minimum, we assume this means that any review to be initiated on the
> GNSO Operating Procedures would not take place till after the type and
> nature of the final recommendations from the GNSO Review are clearer.
>
> - In light of the above points on #3, #4 and the GNSO Review, we
> therefore respectfully suggest that #3 be reworded to more accurately
> reflect the GNSO Council’s intent as noted above; #4 refer expressly
> to the GNSO Review rather than a “periodic review” by the SCI, and
> perhaps the final paragraph be reworked if these suggestions are adopted. 
>
> We thought we ought to offer these suggestions at this time in order
> to provide further context and background for those SCI members who
> were not part of the Los Angeles discussion and/or who missed the last
> SCI call, so that the SCI can decide how it wishes to proceed in
> respect of the draft letter. In particular, given that we were able
> only to issue invitations for the next meeting at a time when Europe
> and Asia would have ended their work week, we hope that these comments
> are helpful.
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
> Mary Wong
> Senior Policy Director
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
> Telephone: +1 603 574 4892
> Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
> From: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx>>
> Date: Friday, January 23, 2015 at 14:04
> To: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> Cc: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>, Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx
> <mailto:avri@xxxxxxx>>, Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
> <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Lori Schulman
> <lori.schulman@xxxxxxxx <mailto:lori.schulman@xxxxxxxx>>,
> "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>"
> <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>, Glen de Saint Géry
> <Glen@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair
> Jonathan Robinson
>
>     We may yet be able to resolve this on the list.  (Perhaps a
>     scheduled meeting will further inspire us to do so.)
>
>     In that spirit, I attach a revised version of the letter, which is
>     also available as an editable Google Doc
>     at 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N2_MB5-K8u2SVTdTi2EnAvIuVCzPpFQb7FsM5fP3iQU/edit?usp=sharing
>
>     In response to Avri, I note that these 4 items were phrased as
>     "possibilities" for the entire 2015 year, which leaves the
>     question open of where in the year any of these items should be
>     handled  I've added language to clarify that items 3 and 4 should
>     await the results of the GNSO Review.  On point number 2, I've
>     tried to clarify the remaining issue a bit (the language of the
>     actual Operating Procedures remains ambiguous, and the language
>     put into the motion to "fix" the situation is not in the actual
>     Operating Procedures).
>
>     If this meets Avri's concerns and the approval of all, we can send
>     this out and give ourselves back an hour of our time.
>
>     I look forward to your responses.
>
>     Greg
>
>     *Gregory S. Shatan *
>
>     Partner|* **Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
>
>     *666 Third Avenue **|**New York, NY 10017-5621*
>
>     *Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
>
>     *Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
>
>     */gsshatan@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gsshatan@xxxxxxxxxxx>/*
>
>     *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:gregshatanipc@xxxxxxxxx> *
>
>     */www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>/*
>
>
>     On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne
>     <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>         Julie,
>
>         Although I think everyone preferred to finalize via the list,
>         there was no one expressing disagreement to the proposed
>         changes as Avri has done.  As far as I know, Avri is still the
>         primary and I do not believe that addressing her issues on the
>         list is going to result in meeting the deadline. 
>
>          
>
>         PLEASE ISSUE THE INVITATION FOR THE CALL NEXT TUESDAY AS
>         REQUESTED.  I would appreciate your doing this today.
>
>          
>
>         Thank you,
>
>         Anne
>
>          
>
>         **
>
>               
>
>         *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel*
>
>         *Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | *
>
>         *One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611*
>
>         *(T) 520.629.4428 <tel:520.629.4428> | (F) 520.879.4725
>         <tel:520.879.4725>*
>
>         *_AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>_**|
>         www.LRRLaw.com <http://www.lrrlaw.com/>*
>
>
>
>          
>
>         **
>
>
>               
>
>         * *
>
>          
>
>         *From:*Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]
>         *Sent:* Thursday, January 22, 2015 2:52 PM
>         *To:* Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Avri Doria'; 'Thomas Rickert';
>         Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
>         *Cc:* Lori Schulman; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>; Glen de Saint Géry
>         *Subject:* Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO
>         Council Chair Jonathan Robinson
>         *Importance:* High
>
>          
>
>         Hi Anne,
>
>          
>
>         If I recall correctly I think some people raised concerns on
>         the call that they would not be available next week and also
>         that it was a very busy time for various constituencies as
>         they prepare for Singapore.  I would respectfully suggest that
>         perhaps you could encourage people to provide their thoughts
>         on the list.  In particular, it would be helpful if each
>         primary member could indicate whether he or she supports the
>         letter as is, or if not, suggest changes that would enable
>         them to support it.
>
>          
>
>         Best regards,
>
>         Julie
>
>          
>
>         *From: *<Aikman-Scalese>, Anne <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>>
>         *Date: *Thursday, January 22, 2015 4:01 PM
>         *To: *'Avri Doria' <avri@xxxxxxx <mailto:avri@xxxxxxx>>,
>         'Thomas Rickert' <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>>, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
>         <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>         *Cc: *Lori Schulman <lori.schulman@xxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:lori.schulman@xxxxxxxx>>, Julie Hedlund
>         <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>,
>         "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>"
>         <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>         <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>>, Glen de Saint Géry
>         <Glen@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>>
>         *Subject: *RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO
>         Council Chair Jonathan Robinson
>
>          
>
>             Thanks Avri. Shall we schedule a call on January 27 to
>             discuss?  As per the mp3, we did not have any disagreement
>             on these points during the call, but we can certainly set
>             up a call January 27 to discuss.  Sounds like we need to
>             do that.  Will staff please proceed accordingly?
>
>             Thank you,
>
>             Anne
>
>              
>
>             **
>
>               
>
>             *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel*
>
>             *Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | *
>
>             *One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona
>             85701-1611*
>
>             *(T) 520.629.4428 <tel:520.629.4428> | (F) 520.879.4725
>             <tel:520.879.4725>*
>
>             *_AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>_**|
>             www.LRRLaw.com <http://www.lrrlaw.com/>*
>
>
>
>              
>
>
>               
>
>             * *
>
>              
>
>             *From:*Avri Doria [mailto:avri@xxxxxxx]
>             *Sent:* Thursday, January 22, 2015 1:11 PM
>             *To:* Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Thomas Rickert'; Wolf-Ulrich
>             Knoben
>             *Cc:* Lori Schulman; Julie Hedlund;
>             gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>             <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>; Glen de Saint Géry
>             *Subject:* Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Letter to GNSO
>             Council Chair Jonathan Robinson
>
>              
>
>             Hi,
>
>             Belated apologies for missing the meeting.
>
>             Was there a consensus call on the four issues that are
>             being included?  I know we have not done one on the list
>             and was wondering if one had been taken during the call.
>
>             A council liaison I would like to know that for my
>             report.  I will of course faithfully faithfully any letter
>             the SCI wishes sent.
>
>             As a primary member I have doubts on whether I would have
>             participated in a positive consensus on these four items,
>             though I might have allowed them to pass without comment.
>             Specifically on #3, I have been explicit in not supporting
>             a review of consensus levels while the GNSO review was
>             ongoing.  I also do not see the point of #2, as we could
>             have done this before but opted not to.  So while I would
>             understand the council requesting such a comment, I do not
>             understand the SCI asking to redo work it already did and
>             has had accepted. Yes we had a difference of opinion on
>             whether to include resubmitted notions and that may have
>             been a good reason to withhold our recommendation.  But
>             since we went ahead, I do not understand the SCI asking to
>             reopen this issue.
>
>             I can not support the letter as it stands.
>
>             thanks
>
>             avri
>
>
>
>             I have always been against, number 3, for example until
>             such time as we knew the results of any reorganizational
>             review.
>
>             On 22-Jan-15 14:07, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:
>
>                 Dear all,
>
>                 Please see attached the revised letter to GNSO Council
>                 based on Tuesday’s SCI conference call.  If you have
>                 any comments, please supply them to the list prior to
>                 1300 UTC Monday,  January 26. 
>
>                  
>
>                 *Avri*, again, as Council liaison for SCI, we are
>                 requesting 15 minutes on the schedule for Working
>                 Sessions in Singapore for you to present this letter
>                 to Council.  (I am unable to attend and SCI will not
>                 be meeting separately there.)
>
>                  
>
>                 Thank you,
>
>                 Anne
>
>                  
>
>                 
> *mailbox:///C:/Users/Avri/AppData/Roaming/Thunderbird/Profiles/6ebmyl35.default/Mail/Local%20Folders/0-Responsibiities.sbd/SCI?number=16975542&header=quotebody&part=1.1.2&filename=image001.gif*
>
>                       
>
>                 *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel*
>
>                 *Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | *
>
>                 *One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona
>                 85701-1611*
>
>                 *(T) 520.629.4428 <tel:520.629.4428> | (F)
>                 520.879.4725 <tel:520.879.4725>*
>
>                 *_AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>_ |
>                 www.LRRLaw.com <http://www.lrrlaw.com/>*
>
>
>
>                  
>
>
>                       
>
>                 * *
>
>                  
>
>                 *From:* Thomas Rickert [mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>                 *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:32 AM
>                 *To:* Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
>                 *Cc:* Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Lori Schulman; Julie
>                 Hedlund; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>                 <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>; Glen de
>                 Saint Géry
>                 *Subject:* Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] NCPH
>                 Intersessional 2015 Recordings & Transcripts
>
>                  
>
>                 Same here. Sorry!
>
>                  
>
>                 Best
>
>                 Thomas
>
>                  
>
>                     Am 21.01.2015 um 09:44 schrieb WUKnoben
>                     <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx>>:
>
>                      
>
>                     Sorry all that I missed the call! I came back late
>                     after the Frankfurt meeting.
>
>
>                     Best regards
>
>                     Wolf-Ulrich
>
>                      
>
>                     *From:* Aikman-Scalese, Anne
>                     <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>                     *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 10:16 PM
>
>                     *To:* 'Lori Schulman'
>                     <mailto:lori.schulman@xxxxxxxx> ; Julie Hedlund
>                     <mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> ; 
> gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>                     *Cc:* 'Glen de Saint Géry' <mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>                     *Subject:* [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: NCPH
>                     Intersessional 2015 Recordings & Transcripts
>
>                      
>
>                     Many thanks Lori.  We will revise the draft letter
>                     to GNSO Council in accordance with comments
>                     received during today’s meeting.
>
>                      
>
>                     Separately, *and specifically directed at Avri as
>                     Council liaison*, staff advised today that certain
>                     SCI matters were put “on hold” last week by
>                     Council.  (Thanks Mary for this info.)  Staff also
>                     advised that it is part of the function of Council
>                     liaison to provide SCI with information as to
>                     action taken by Council affecting its work. 
>
>                      
>
>                     Amr mentioned that GNSO Council meeting minutes
>                     are not available until the next GNSO Council
>                     meeting and as such, may not be timely.  
>
>                      
>
>                     Thanks everyone who participated in today’s call. 
>                     We will be circulating the redraft of the letter
>                     soon.  We want to be sure our letter and request
>                     for time on the Council’s work schedule for
>                     Singapore reaches Council in a timely fashion and
>                     preferably well before February 1.
>
>                     Anne
>
>                      
>
>                     *<image002.gif>*
>
>                       
>
>                     *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel*
>
>                     *Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP | *
>
>                     *One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson,
>                     Arizona 85701-1611*
>
>                     *(T) 520.629.4428 <tel:520.629.4428> | (F)
>                     520.879.4725 <tel:520.879.4725>*
>
>                     *_AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>_ | www.LRRLaw.com
>                     <http://www.lrrlaw.com/>*
>
>
>
>                      
>
>
>                       
>
>                     * *
>
>                      
>
>                     *From:* owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
>                     [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] *On
>                     Behalf Of *Lori Schulman
>                     *Sent:* Tuesday, January 20, 2015 1:11 PM
>                     *To:* Julie Hedlund;
>                     gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
>                     *Subject:* [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] NCPH
>                     Intersessional 2015 Recordings & Transcripts
>
>                      
>
>                     Dear All,
>
>                      
>
>                     Below is the link for last week’s
>                     intersessional.   I didn’t find the joint letter
>                     re GNSO review posted separately.
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                     
> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51416553
>
>                      
>
>                     Lori
>
>                      
>
>                     *Lori S. Schulman* · General Counsel
>                     1703 North Beauregard Street
>
>                     Alexandria, VA  22311-1714
>
>                     P 703-575-5678 <tel:703-575-5678>
>                     · Lori.Schulman@xxxxxxxx
>                     <mailto:Lori.Schulman@xxxxxxxx>
>                     <image003.jpg>
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                     This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for 
> the sole use of
>
>                      
>
>                     the person(s) to whom it has been sent, and may contain 
> information that is
>
>                      
>
>                     confidential or legally protected. If you are not the 
> intended recipient or
>
>                      
>
>                     have received this message in error, you are not 
> authorized to copy,
>
>                     distribute, or otherwise use this message or its 
> attachments. Please notify the
>
>                     sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently 
> delete this message and any
>
>                      
>
>                     attachments. ASCD makes no guarantee that this e-mail is 
> error or virus free.
>
>                      
>
>                     
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>                     This message and any attachments are intended only
>                     for the use of the individual or entity to which
>                     they are addressed. If the reader of this message
>                     or an attachment is not the intended recipient or
>                     the employee or agent responsible for delivering
>                     the message or attachment to the intended
>                     recipient you are hereby notified that any
>                     dissemination, distribution or copying of this
>                     message or any attachment is strictly prohibited.
>                     If you have received this communication in error,
>                     please notify us immediately by replying to the
>                     sender. The information transmitted in this
>                     message and any attachments may be privileged, is
>                     intended only for the personal and confidential
>                     use of the intended recipients, and is covered by
>                     the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
>                     U.S.C. §2510-2521. 
>
>                  
>
>                  
>
>                 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>                 This message and any attachments are intended only for
>                 the use of the individual or entity to which they are
>                 addressed. If the reader of this message or an
>                 attachment is not the intended recipient or the
>                 employee or agent responsible for delivering the
>                 message or attachment to the intended recipient you
>                 are hereby notified that any dissemination,
>                 distribution or copying of this message or any
>                 attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have
>                 received this communication in error, please notify us
>                 immediately by replying to the sender. The information
>                 transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
>                 privileged, is intended only for the personal and
>                 confidential use of the intended recipients, and is
>                 covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
>                 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>
>              
>
>              
>
>             
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>             This message and any attachments are intended only for the
>             use of the individual or entity to which they are
>             addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment
>             is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
>             responsible for delivering the message or attachment to
>             the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
>             dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or
>             any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have
>             received this communication in error, please notify us
>             immediately by replying to the sender. The information
>             transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
>             privileged, is intended only for the personal and
>             confidential use of the intended recipients, and is
>             covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
>             U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>
>
>         
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         This message and any attachments are intended only for the use
>         of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If
>         the reader of this message or an attachment is not the
>         intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
>         delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient
>         you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
>         or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly
>         prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
>         please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The
>         information transmitted in this message and any attachments
>         may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and
>         confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by
>         the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
>
>



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy