RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Action Items and Documents from 13 Oct WT Call

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

Understood.  The GCOT will discuss today whether to include the exemption
and if so the language to recommend for it.

 

Ray

 

From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:50 AM
To: Ray Fassett; gnso-osc-ops
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Action Items and Documents from 13 Oct WT Call

 

Ray,

Per the action item from Wednesday's meeting, I forwarded the request from
the Work Team for language relating to the issue of SOIs (and DOIs) for
staff.  I have not yet received a response from Legal staff to the Work
Team's request.

Thanks,
Julie   


On 10/15/10 10:44 AM, "Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thank you Julie,  can you update us on where staff is on this proposition?
 
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.


I am ok with adding the exemption (and in fact believe it important in some
form) as a new 5.2.3 if worded something like this:
 
ICANN staff and contractors working exclusively on behalf of ICANN that are
assigned to support a GNSO Group are expected to  work in the interests of
ICANN and not for any other purpose or interests.  ICANN staff and
contractors working exclusively on behalf of ICANN are  therefore exempted
from providing separate Statements of Interest as defined  in Paragraph 5.1.


 
 
 

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 4:54 PM
To: gnso-osc-ops
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Action Items and Documents from 13 Oct WT Call

All,

I meant to include a Word document for the suggested changes to Section
5.3.3 so that you could make edits if you wished.  Here is the Word
document.

Thanks,
Julie


On 10/14/10 4:51 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Ray and Work Team members,

Attached are two documents for consideration.  The first is the proposed
revisions to Section 5.0 to remove the requirement for written DOIs and for
polling individuals for changes to DOIs.  (See details in the actions
below).  The second are the suggested changes to Section 5.3.3 that Legal
provided in September to address concerns raised by Kristina Rosette about
the difficultly of determining possible interests relating to parties with
which ICANN has contracts. Our next meeting is tomorrow at 1700 UTC/1300
EDT/1000 PDT.  Please let me know if you have any questions or
clarifications to the action items and recap of our discussion yesterday.

Best regards,

Julie

Action Items:

1. Declarations of Interest: Whether to Provide in Writing
After extensive discussion the WT agreed to modify the procedures to delete
the requirement for written DOIs. The WT agreed specifically to delete the
word "written" in the definition for DOIs in Section 5.1 definitions. In
addition, the WT agreed to remove the requirement for polling individuals
for their DOIs at the beginning of the meeting by deleting the second
sentence in Section 5.4.2 Duty to Remind Participants and Speakers where
polling is mentioned as a requirement. The Work Team asked staff to make the
changes in the document and to send it to the WT for review and for
submission to the OSC. They also noted that the PPSC has included the
SOI/DOI procedures in its WG guidelines and that these would need to be
amended to reflect the changes. It was agreed that the OSC Chair could send
the revised procedures to the PPSC Chair for consideration and incorporation
into the WG guidelines.
Actors: Staff
Due Date: 15 October -- DONE, See attached document. 

2. Statements of Interest: Suggested Language from Legal re: Staff
In the absence of language from ICANN Legal staff on the issue of staff
providing SOIs, the WT discussed several alternatives. It agreed that staff
and full-time exclusive ICANN contractors could be exempted from providing
SOIs, but only if they were included in the requirement to provide DOIs and
that Section 5.4.2 should be modified accordingly. However, they did not
agree to exempt non-exclusive/non-full time ICANN contractors or how to
address them. The WT strongly urged Legal staff to provide language relating
to staff SOIs for consideration at the WT's next meeting on 15 October so
that any changes could be incorporated into a revision of the procedures to
be send to the OSC in time for review prior to the GNSO Council meeting on
28 October.
Action: OGC and Legal Staff
Due Date: 15 October

3. Section 5.3.3 SOI Questions Relating to a List of ICANN Contractors
The WT began discussion on this issue, but decided to revisit it at the
meeting on 15 October. Staff agreed to send the suggested changes proposed
by Legal staff in September.
Action: Staff and Work Team members
Due Date: 15 October - DONE, See attached document.