RE: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

[Claudio Di Gangi <cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>]

Rafik,

Generally, a grandfather clause is a short term exception to a new rule.

In this case, the grandfather clause would allow existing office holders to 
complete their current terms of office without application of the new rule. For 
example, if a particular Group has elected its leadership under a five-year 
term, and these office holders were only in year 2...they would be permitted to 
complete their service under the terms of which they were elected. Once 
existing office holders complete their terms, the new rule would start applying.

The idea is just to provide a safeguard to minimize unintended consequences 
which may result when new rules are created.

Hope this clarifies.

Claudio

From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 3:54 PM
To: Claudio Di Gangi
Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Papac, Krista; Victoria McEvedy; zahid@xxxxxxxxx; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx; Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

Thanks Claudio,
I would like to just to know what is the meaning of grandfather clause?

Rafik

2010/3/26 Claudio Di Gangi <cdigangi@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx>>
Thanks for this excellent analysis Chuck.

As per our discussion on today’s call, I offer the following language to 
further refine:


1.     No person shall serve in the same constituency or SG leadership position 
for more than four consecutive years.

2.     A grandfather clause shall cover those volunteers currently serving in 
leadership positions.

3.     Any exception to this policy would require approval by membership.


From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 10:22 AM
To: Rafik Dammak; Papac, Krista

Cc: Victoria McEvedy; zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx>; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Julie 
Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

I have been following the discussion on the topic of term limits for various 
Constituency/SG positions and have come to the conclusion that we are spending 
an awful lot of time on this issue.  Maybe it will be helpful if we back up and 
consider what our task is in this regard.  Our overall objective is to make 
recommendations regarding how to implement the Board approved GNSO 
recommendations with regard to Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies.  From the 
checklist that we developed (see 
https://st.icann.org/data/workspaces/icann-osc/attachments/constituency_operations_team:20090301154146-0-8526/original/Draft%2520OSC-CSG%2520WT%2520Board%2520Recommendation%2520Checklist.doc)
 for the CSG WT, the only one that seems to apply here is this one: "

Operating principles should ensure constituencies function in a representative, 
open, transparent & democratic manner."  If we go back to the Board approved 
recommendations themselves 
(http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb08.pdf),
 in particular Section 6, here are the ones that I think apply in this case 
followed in each case with my personal comments in italic font:

 1.  "Our goal is to make the way in which stakeholders interact in the GNSO, 
whether organized as constituencies, interest groups or another vehicle, as 
inclusive and representative as possible, without sacrificing effectiveness or 
efficiency." (last paragraph p.39) - Whatever we recommend regarding term 
limits, they should in our best judgment not sacrifice effectiveness or 
efficiency.
 2.  "At present, each constituency has a different set of membership and 
operating processes, and it is difficult for an individual to have a 
quantifiable impact on the policy process other than through a constituency. . 
. . One solution is for each constituency to have a clearly communicated set of 
participation rules and operating principles that are based on common 
principles developed by the GNSO." (3rd to last paragraph on p.42) - Is there a 
common principle that we can agree on regarding term limits that can be applied 
generally to all constituencies and SGs? I think that the quoted statement from 
the Board recommendation document in item 4 below may give us this common 
principle.
 3.  "The reviews of the GNSO suggest that there is a need for greater 
transparency within constituencies and greater consistency across constituency 
structures. The constituencies should take the lead in formulating common 
operating principles, with participation from the Council and staff. Within 
certain broad and important guidelines, there can still be room for innovation 
and differentiation in the detailed procedures developed by each constituency 
that best meet the needs of that constituency." (Last paragraph on p.42 to 
p.43) - Note that not everything has to be standardized for all constituencies 
and SGs so we need to try to find a balance between common practices and 
flexibility to deal with the diversity of constituencies and SGs.
 4.  "There should be term limits for constituency officers, so as to help 
attract new members and provide everyone with the chance to participate in 
leadership positions." (2nd to last bullet on p.43) - As commented in item 3 
above, I believe that this is a general principle that can be applied regarding 
term limits.
 5.  "As noted, constituency procedures should establish term limits for 
constituency officers in order to help attract new participants by providing 
individuals with more opportunity to participate in leadership positions. This 
is similar to the rationale for the GNSO’s decision to establish term limits 
for Councilors. These and other steps can help improve the global distribution 
of constituency participants and elected GNSO representatives, along with 
focused, ICANN staff-supported, constituency participation recruitment efforts 
for officers and GNSO Councilors (see LSE Rec. #5; Sharry Rec. #3)."  (last 
paragraph on p.43 to p.44) - This adds a little more clarity to item 4.  It 
seems to me that it is a good goal to "improve the global distribution of 
constituency participants" in all areas of constituency and SG operations while 
still maintaining enough flexibility to accommodate differences.
Based on the above, I would suggest that we recommend the following: There 
should be term limits for all constituency and SG leadership positions that do 
not exceed four years.  Here is my rationale:

 *   I fully understand the difficultly of finding leaders who have the time 
and are willing to devote the time to serve in leadership capacities so I agree 
with those who argue against term limits that are too short; also there is a 
steep learning curve, so it is useful to minimize too rapid turnover.  Along 
this same line, it may be helpful to note that the Board is currently planning 
to lengthen Board terms for some of the same reasons.
 *   I also understand the risk of capture within groups.  Depending on the 
organizational structure, capture may occur at different levels of leadership, 
so it seems to me that it makes sense to apply  the Board recommendation of 
term limits to all leadership positions.  I would add that the issue of capture 
was a concern before the very first DNSO constituencies were formed over ten 
years ago.
 *   I see no need to proscribe how constituencies or SGs apply the term 
limits.  If they think that four one-year terms meet their needs, fine. If two 
2-year terms works or if one 4-year terms is decided to be the better approach, 
fine. If constituencies or SGs want to establish term limits shorter than four 
years, I believe they should have that freedom even though I think that goes 
counter to my rationale in the first bullet above.
 *   If a constituency or SG does not have enough members to allow for turnover 
of leadership at least every four years, then I wonder whether they are truly 
representative of the broader community they supposed to represent.  I clearly 
understand that there will always only be a minority of of individuals who can 
and will step up to the plate to lead, but if any of our groups are so small 
that this becomes a serious problem, then there probably needs to be more 
outreach within the group and outside the group as applicable, which I believe 
is CSG WT Task 2.
 *   Finally, I believe that term limits not to exceed four years would 
accomplish the Board approved recommendations regarding term limits and the 
goals articulated in that regard without compromising effectiveness or 
efficiency.
My apologies for the lengthy message, but I hope it helps.

Chuck

P.S. - I don't know if I just overlooked it, but I don't think that our wiki 
has a link to the Board approved recommendations.  Seems to me that should be 
added in an easy to find way.
________________________________
From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 3:54 AM
To: Papac, Krista
Cc: Victoria McEvedy; zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx>; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Julie 
Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting
Hello All,

I am little surprised that the most active groups (and those having strong 
interests in domain names) sounds having problems to find people who can commit 
and volunteer :)

let's say that the 2 years term and 2 terms limitations is the  worse case, but 
if Registrar group want 1 year term, it is up to them. if the limitation is 3 
years in office which is less than 4 years (2+2 in GNSO) it may be accepted too.

we need to find common ground, I am really worried that we are keeping 
exceptions every time for each recommendation and making them too much weak 
with all these rewording .
@Krista it is important to mandate a length of time for term, otherwise there 
is a risk  capture  and less accountability.

Regards

Rafik
2010/3/19 Papac, Krista 
<Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>

 1.  It is not easy to find people who can commit to two-year terms.  In the 
case of my SG, we already need three people who can commit to two-year terms if 
we extend the requirement to the EC also, it means we now need seven people who 
can make such a commitment.  This is not practical or easily done.
 2.  I don’t believe it is the GNSO’s purpose nor their goal to tell GROUPs 
what their term limits should be, but rather to develop common principles.  
Term limits are a common principle and should be applied, but how does the GNSO 
know what is an appropriate term limit for a given group?
 3.  I don’t understand why we feel it is appropriate to mandate any length of 
time for a term.  Victoria, why do you feel so strongly about setting the term 
limit and/or setting it to two-years?
 4.  I agree with Zahid, it is not a matter of status quo or interest.  It is a 
practical matter.




Krista Papac
Iron Mountain Digital
5530 Bandini Blvd
Bell, CA  90201  US
Home Office: +1.714.846.8780
Mobile: +1.714.865.7655
Fax: +1.323.443.3573
krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

“Software Escrow for Dummies” - order your complimentary copy today at 
www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies<http://www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies>

New Gartner Report: Successful Software Escrow Requires Planning and Negotiation
Gartner advises: “It is also important that the licensee continue to track the 
software vendor’s financials and viability annually, because any signs of 
financial problems would justify the cost of verification services.” Continue 
reading the full report at: 
http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/ironmountain/170569.html

________________________________
From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Victoria McEvedy
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:23 PM
To: zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx>; Papac, Krista; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafik Dammak

Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

Simpler, standardized and easier to understand Groups should be less 
logistically challenging for all.


Victoria McEvedy
Principal
McEvedys
Solicitors and Attorneys
[cid:image001.jpg@01CACD00.4A786A20]

96 Westbourne Park Road
London
W2 5PL

T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169

www.mcevedy.eu<http://www.mcevedy.eu>
Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the exclusive 
use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also be legally 
privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us know by reply 
immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without reading, copying 
or forwarding the contents.
This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer is 
created by this email communication.

From: Zahid Jamil [mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: 18 March 2010 22:18
To: Victoria McEvedy; Papac, Krista; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafik Dammak
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

Its not a matter of status quo or any interest. It will be a logistical 
challenge just to implement such a situation.


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.


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

________________________________
From: Victoria McEvedy <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:13:16 +0000
To: 
zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx><zahid@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx>>;
 Papac, 
Krista<Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx><owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>>;
 Rafik Dammak<rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Julie Hedlund<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>; 
gnso-osc-csg<gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

But is our mission to recreate or justify the status quo?

It seems we may have lost sight of the BGC’s aims here.

If the recommendations are to be no more than everyone can do their own thing 
as long as they record it in their charters ----we have wasted a great deal of 
time and effort.


Victoria McEvedy
Principal
McEvedys
Solicitors and Attorneys
[cid:image001.jpg@01CACD00.4A786A20]

96 Westbourne Park Road
London
W2 5PL

T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122
F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721
M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169

www.mcevedy.eu<http://www.mcevedy.eu>
Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972
This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for the exclusive 
use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments may also be legally 
privileged. If you have received this in error, please let us know by reply 
immediately and destroy the email and its attachments without reading, copying 
or forwarding the contents.
This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no retainer is 
created by this email communication.

From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
Sent: 18 March 2010 22:04
To: Papac, Krista; 
owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafik Dammak
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 NairobiMeeting

I agree with Krista. The BC similarly has varying term limits of EC compared to 
Councillors -we even have variance in between councillors.


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.


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

________________________________
From: "Papac, Krista" 
<Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:35:37 -0400
To: Rafik Dammak<rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Julie Hedlund<julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>>; 
gnso-osc-csg<gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 Nairobi Meeting

Hello Rafik,

I do not think EC term limits have to consistent with GNSO term limits.  In 
fact, in the RrSG our current term limits are different than our GNSO term 
limits.  RrSG EC term limits are one-year terms, with a consecutive three-year 
restriction in the same office.  I think it is widely accepted that GNSO 
Councilors serve two-year terms, but elected EC officials vary.  Sometimes it 
is difficult to get an EC official to commit for such a lengthy term – and at 
the end of the day, I feel any and all term limits should be as set out in the 
Charter of the GROUP.  Although, since the GNSO Councilor office affects 
most/all GROUPS I can see a need for a consistent policy there.

I hope that helps.

Thanks,
Krista

Krista Papac
Iron Mountain Digital
5530 Bandini Blvd
Bell, CA  90201  US
Home Office: +1.714.846.8780
Mobile: +1.714.865.7655
Fax: +1.323.443.3573
krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

“Software Escrow for Dummies” - order your complimentary copy today at 
www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies<http://www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies>

New Gartner Report: Successful Software Escrow Requires Planning and Negotiation
Gartner advises: “It is also important that the licensee continue to track the 
software vendor’s financials and viability annually, because any signs of 
financial problems would justify the cost of verification services.” Continue 
reading the full report at: 
http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/ironmountain/170569.html

________________________________
From: Rafik Dammak 
[mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 9:01 AM
To: Papac, Krista
Cc: Julie Hedlund; gnso-osc-csg
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] RE: Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 Nairobi Meeting

Hello Krista,


do you think that EC shouldn't comply to term limitations which is applied to 
GNSO council itself?

Rafik
2010/3/15 Papac, Krista 
<Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Krista.Papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
All,

Here are my suggested changes to Part II, Section 4a.  Additions are bracketed 
in red capital letters and deletions are stricken through in red.

4. Elections
a. All  {GROUP} {CHARTERS SHALL CLEARLY DELINEATE HOW) {ELECTED POSITIONS}, 
including representatives to Stakeholder Group {EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES} and the 
GNSO Council, shall {BE ELECTED, WHAT THE TERM LIMITS ARE FOR EACH POSITION, 
AND MAXIMUM NUMBER OF} have a maximum two year limit and a maximum of two 
consecutive terms {IN THAT  THE SAME POSITION}. {ANY OTHER PROCEDURES RELATED 
TO ELECTIONS OR EXCEPTIONS TO ELECTION PROCEDURES MUST ALSO BE DESCRIBED IN THE 
GROUP CHARTER.}  An Officer who has served two consecutive terms must remain 
out of office for one full term prior to serving any subsequent term {IN THAT 
SAME POSITION   {GROUPS}  MAY} elect terms and term limits below these maximums 
at their discretion. {WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES DEMAND EXCEPTIONS TO THIS REQUIREMENT. 
EXCEPTIONS MAY ONLY BE MADE WITH SUPPORT FROM TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY OF THE 
MEMBERSHIP.}
b. It is recommended {GOING FORWARD} that  {GROUPS} publish and maintain a list 
of all Office holders, past and present, { {GROUP} members and to provide 
transparency for term limits.

I also want to comment on Part II, Section 1c.  I believe we may have closed 
this section out, but since I was unable to make the calls due to the 
reschedule time I am providing my comment to the WT in hopes we can make a 
change.  This section (pasted below) refers to Executive Committees and term 
limits.  From the perspective of the RrSG, this section should also refer to 
the Group Charter, rather than dictating what term limits are. I have suggested 
changes below.  Additions are bracketed in red capital letters and deletions 
are stricken through in red.

1. Executive Committees:
a. All Executive Committees must promptly publish action points, decisions and 
any resolutions to constituency members. It is recommended that prompt 
publication means within a reasonable period and a guideline is between 72 
hours and 1 week of the relevant meeting.
b. All Executive Committees must publish to constituency members their rules 
and procedures, decision making process and criteria.
c. A limit of two years per term and a maximum {NUMBER OF CONSECUTIVE} of two 
terms per office being a total maximum of four years in any office (hereafter 
Term Limits) shall apply to members of Executive Committees {AND MUST BE 
DESCRIBED IN THE GROUP CHARTER}. {GROUP CHARTERS MUST ALSO HAVE PROCEDURES FOR 
REELECTING MEMBERS} A member who has  {HAVE} served two {THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF} 
consecutive terms on the Executive Committee must remain out of office for one 
full term prior to serving any subsequent term as a member of the Executive 
Committee {IN THE SAME POSITION). {ANY EXCEPTION TO THIS POLICY WOULD REQUIRE 
APPROVAL BY THE MEMBERSHIP.} {MUST ALSO BE OUTLINED IN THE GROUP CHARTER.}

Thank you,
Krista

Krista Papac
Iron Mountain Digital
5530 Bandini Blvd
Bell, CA  90201  US
Home Office: +1.714.846.8780
Mobile: +1.714.865.7655
Fax: +1.323.443.3573
krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

“Software Escrow for Dummies” - order your complimentary copy today at 
www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies<http://www.ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies>

New Gartner Report: Successful Software Escrow Requires Planning and Negotiation
Gartner advises: “It is also important that the licensee continue to track the 
software vendor’s financials and viability annually, because any signs of 
financial problems would justify the cost of verification services.” Continue 
reading the full report at: 
http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/ironmountain/170569.html

________________________________
From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>] On 
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 1:21 AM
To: gnso-osc-csg

Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] Actions/Summary: 07 March 2010 Nairobi Meeting

Dear Work Team members,


Here are the actions/summary from yesterday’s meeting.  Please let me know if 
you have any changes or questions.  Our next meeting will be held next Friday, 
26 March at 1300 UTC/0600 PST/0900 EST for one hour.  The actions and summary 
are included on the wiki at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.  Final 
agreed-upon changes to the Task 1, Subtask 1 document are on the wiki at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_stakeholder_group_operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_1
 and the Task 1, Subtask 2 document at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_and_stake_holder_group_operations_work_team_task_1_subtask_2.
  Changes are shown in ALL CAPS, strikeout, and curly brackets.  Thank you very 
much.

Best regards,

Julie

Action Items:
1. Work Team members are requested to review the "Revised Language in Task 1, 
Subtask 2 through the end of Part II, Section 8 and provide any comments by the 
next meeting on Friday 26 March.
2. Section 4 Elections Paragraph a: Krista Papac agreed to suggest alternate 
language.
3. Section 5 Voting:

 *   Paragraph a and b: Mary Wong and Zahid Jamil are requested to review the 
revised language.
 *   New paragraph d: Work Team members are requested to consider and comment 
on the language.
4. Section 8 Policy:

 *   Paragraph a: Victoria McEvedy is requested to provide clarification on the 
meaning of the statement.
 *   Paragraph d: Mary Wong is requested to provide alternate language for Work 
Team consideration.

Summary:

 *   Task 1, Subtask 1: Work Team members agreed to the final version of the 
revised recommendations.
 *   Task 1, Subtask 2: Work Team members reviewed and discussed changes 
through Part II, Section 8 Policy.

________________________________

The information contained in this email message and its attachments is intended 
only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above, 
unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over the 
Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or have 
requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy 
laws by means of email or in an attachment to email, you must select a more 
secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to protect 
such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient 
and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action based on 
the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, misuse or copying or disclosure of this communication is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please 
notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.

________________________________

The information contained in this email message and its attachments is intended 
only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above, 
unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over the 
Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or have 
requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy 
laws by means of email or in an attachment to email, you must select a more 
secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to protect 
such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient 
and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action based on 
the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, misuse or copying or disclosure of this communication is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please 
notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4956 (20100318)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4956 (20100318)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4956 (20100318) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4956 (20100318) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
________________________________

The information contained in this email message and its attachments is intended 
only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above, 
unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over the 
Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or have 
requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy 
laws by means of email or in an attachment to email, you must select a more 
secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to protect 
such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient 
and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action based on 
the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, misuse or copying or disclosure of this communication is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please 
notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.