Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Conflicting Language on Staff Roles

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Of course we should consider it as substantive, but perhaps not conclusive.  
Other legal opinion might be required.  It is one of the interesting things 
about law: like philosophy there is always more than one spin on the opinion, 
the only real difference being, law has judges.

a.


On 29 Sep 2010, at 15:44, Ray Fassett wrote:

> "But a legal reason was never presented."
> 
> Good question.  I am officially asking staff:  Is there a legal reason we
> should be aware of?  But I am also asking the WT members too that if there
> is, that we consider it as substantive input in approaching our work.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 2:46 PM
> To: gnso-osc-ops
> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Conflicting Language on Staff Roles
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Not sure I see the contradiction in any of this.
> 
> Though the expertise issue, is certainly one that prompts me to argue that
> in their role as expert, it is important to know of any competing interests.
> I..e not that this happened, but if someone was chair of the IETF WG on IDN
> TLD synchronization (no such group, but it would be a volunteer position)
> then their participation in an ICANN IDN policy group as a staff member
> should include mention of that other, volunteer, role, i.e an SOI/DOI.
> 
> 
> And of course nothing in this email indicates a change on my position that
> the ICANN Staff, although their roles and responsibilities as staff
> participants are different than other participant's roles and
> responsibilities, are participants and should be subject to the same rules
> as other participants.
> 
> During today's meeting, the possibility was mentioned that there might be a
> legal reason for insisting on an exception for staff.. But a legal reason
> was never presented.
> 
> 
> a.
> 
> On 29 Sep 2010, at 14:25, Julie Hedlund wrote:
> 
>> Dear Ray and Work Team members,
>> 
>> Here are the texts that relate to staff roles as discussed today.  The
> Chair of the PPSC Working Group Work Team is J. Scott Evans.   I will
> produce notes from this call as well as action items, that I will send out
> not later than tomorrow.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Julie
>> 
>> GNSO Working Group Guidelines
>> 
>> 6.1.4 Other Important Roles
>> 
>> .     ICANN Staff - the following distinct Staff roles may be assigned to
> a WG:
>> 
>> o  Expertise (technical, legal, economic, etc.) 
>> 
>> o  Secretariat (fundamentally a support function covering both logistics
> and drafting assistance in a neutral manner reflecting faithfully the
> deliberations of the Working Group) 
>> 
>> o  Operational/Implementation (facilitation with the framework of existing
> policies and rules) 
>> 
>>      . Scoping (for policy matters, internal role of the General Counsel,
> but possibly distinct, guaranteeing respect of the procedures and
> competencies of the different structures) 
>> 
>> SOI/DOI Procedures
>> 
>> 5.2.3. Exemptions
>> 
>> ICANN staff assigned to support a GNSO Group are expected to work in the
> interests of ICANN and the broader interests of the Internet community and
> not for any other purpose or interests.  ICANN staff are therefore exempted
> from providing separate Statements of Interest as defined in Paragraph 5.1.
>> 
>> 
> 
>