Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Actions from 29 Sept/Next Call 13 October

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ray,

Thank you very much for your helpful clarification on the first item and your 
comments on the second item.

Best regards,

Julie

________________________________
From: Ray Fassett <ray@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Julie Hedlund; 'gnso-osc-ops' <gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri Oct 01 10:23:57 2010
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Actions from 29 Sept/Next Call 13 October
Thank you, Julie.

To your first action item, and not to split hairs, I think what I was looking 
for from legal was an opinion of their reason (if they have one) as it pertains 
to the ICANN organization (such as a liability concern, making this up) vs. a 
legal reason (such as the citing of any statue or law).

For the second action item, it appears to me from the discussion, and from 
these documents, that the overriding intent, including by way of various 
examples, was NOT for the DOI to be a required, written document whereas in 
comparison, it is clearly the intent of the WT for the SOI be a required, 
written document.

Ray

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 11:27 AM
To: gnso-osc-ops
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] Actions from 29 Sept/Next Call 13 October

Dear Ray and Work Team members,

Below are the action items from Wednesday’s call.  These also are posted on the 
wiki at: https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?gnso_operations_team.  Our 
next call is scheduled for Wednesday, 13 October at 1700 UTC/0900 PDT/1300 EDT. 
 Please let me know if you have any questions.  Thanks.

Best regards,

Julie

Action Items:

1. Statements of Interests: Suggested language from Legal re: Staff
The Work Team asked for clarification on the legal reason for staff to be 
exempted from providing a SOI. Also, the Work Team asked Staff to provide 
relevant language concerning staff roles from the WG Guidelines. (DONE: With 
Clarification from Wolf-Ulrich) It was suggested that the language concerning 
staff roles should be consistent in both the SOI/DOI document and the WG 
Guidelines.
Actor: Staff
Due Date: 13 Oct

2. Declarations of Interest: Whether to Provide in Writing
The Work Team asked Staff to review transcripts of previous meetings where this 
issue was discussed to determine the origin of the requirement. Work Team 
members agreed to revisit the issue of a written requirement for DOIs after 
reviewing the information provided by staff, either on the list or at the next 
meeting on 13 October. Staff subsequently completed a review and found that the 
key discussions were held on 17 and 24 February 2010. See attached document. 
Staff also noted that the version of the document provided for discussion on 17 
February does not include either in the definition or in section 4 Disclosures 
of Interest a requirement for these to be provided in writing. See attached 
document.  However, the draft produced following the meeting on 24 February 
2010 includes a requirement for written SOIs and DOIs in their definitions. See 
attached document. It appears that the changes may have been based on the 
discussion on the meeting on the 24th for a need to have written SOIs/DOIs for 
reference.
Actors: Staff and Work Team members
Due Date: 13 October