RE: [gnso-osc] Final OSC review - GNSO procedures - section 5 statements of interest

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve has made what seem to me to be very constructive suggestions.  I
think the OSC has two options: 1) send the document back to the GCOT
with Steve's input for a little more revision; 2) make the changes
ourselves and notify the GCOT of the changes.  I don't have strong
feelings either way, but with either approach, we need to decide whether
the changes can be completed in time to  meet the Council deadline of 13
April for submission to the Council for consideration in the 21 April
meeting. 
 
Even if we decide to make the changes ourselves, it seems that we might
need more time than what will be available between now and the 13th so
it might be best to strive to complete this for the May Council meeting.
Other than the fact that we want to begin to wrap up these kinds of
issues as soon as possible, I do not think there is any pressing need to
rush this through on the 21st.
 
I need to know by the 13th so that we can finalize the proposed Council
agenda on that day.
 
Thoughts?
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven
        Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 5:39 PM
        To: Philip Sheppard; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc] Final OSC review - GNSO procedures -
section 5 statements of interest
        
        
        I have a few concerns about this document.  
         
        First, I suggest that "investment interest" be defined to
exclude ownership of a de minimis number of shares in a publicly traded
company.  Otherwise, anyone who neglected to mention (or perhaps even to
know) that s/he owned a share of Microsoft, Google (both accredited
registrars) or Verisign (among others) might run afoul of section
5.3.3.3.i.  
         
        Second,  we need to recognize that there will be circumstances
in which a requirement (under section 5.3.3.3.ii) to disclose that (for
example) a lawyer represents Google in a matter totally unrelated to
anything in the ICANN purview could present a problem or at least a
considerable delay in getting permission to disclose the representation.
I suppose these could be treated as an "extenuating circumstance" under
5.5.1 and I do not have an amendment to propose at this point but just
wanted to flag the problem.  
         
        Third, the requirement to disclose "potential ... investment
interest in  or compensation arrangement with...." contracted parties
(section 5.3.3.3.iii) will need to be administered in a common-sense
manner.  Potentially, almost anything could happen.  A potential that is
concrete and imminent ought to be distinguished from the broader range
of potential occurrences.  I hope we can assume common sense but that
assumption is not always well founded.  
         
        Fourth, is the reference to "nomination/selection as a work team
member" in section 5.3.3.5.v still relevant now that participation in
many of the GNSO entities is completely self-selected, with no other
nomination or selection process?  Shouldn't this be changed to
"participation"?  
         
        Fifth, I believe the reference to "Declarations of Interest" in
section 5.2.1 should be changed to "Disclosures of Interest" which is
the term used throughout the rest of the document.  
         
        In view of where this stands in the process,  I won't press the
second or third point above, but ask that the simple amendments proposed
in 1, 2, and 5 above be made before the document is passed to the
Council. I have also asked my constituency leadership for any further
input they can provide by the Sunday deadline. 
         
        In my defense, I will note that the deadline for comments on
this document was the 16th until it was accelerated today to the 11th.
I would love to have the luxury of attending to these documents as soon
as I receive them but the nature of the ICANN public comment decathlon
does not permit that and I have no choice but to deal with these roughly
in the order of their impending deadlines.   
         
        Steve Metalitz

________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
        Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 5:05 AM
        To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [gnso-osc] Final OSC review - GNSO procedures - section
5 statements of interest
        
        
        Dear OSC members,
        in view of Council's deadline for their next meeting and the
absence of further comments from the OSC I am bringing forward the end
of our review period to 11 April.
         
        Please find attached a proposed final OSC approved version of
the GCOT teams work on section 5 of the GNSO operating procedures manual
dealing with statements of interest.
        The final version includes the OSC clarifications proposed by
Philip and Chuck.
         
        In the absence of a chorus of disapproval I will submit the
attached to Council on Monday 12 April.
         
        Philip
        OSC Chair
         
        <http://www.aim.be/>