Re: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft Initial Report
Michael, unfortunately I will not have time to review these or add these to the latest version of our document prior to our meeting as I am in other meetings at the moment. Any chance you can add your ‘controversial’ items to the latest version attached so we can review these during the meeting? Thanks, Marika From: "Michael Graham (ELCA)" <migraham@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:migraham@xxxxxxxxxxx>> Date: Wednesday 14 January 2015 11:07 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>, "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>> Subject: RE: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft Initial Report Marika: I realize late, but my English Teacher markup syndrome hit and I made a few (and only a few) word/grammatical changes in the attached. NOTE: some may be controversial as they remove “flag” language – but I presume you will get through these, too. Michael R. Michael R. Graham Senior Corporate Counsel, Intellectual Property Expedia Legal & Corporate Affairs T +1 425.679.4330 | F +1 425.679.7251 M +1 425.241.1459 Expedia, Inc. 333 108th Avenue NE | Bellevue | WA 98004 MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:MiGraham@xxxxxxxxxxx> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this message by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please (i) contact the sender immediately; and (ii) permanently delete the original and any copies of the message including file attachments. Thank you for your cooperation. From: owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx> [mailto:owner-gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 11:34 AM To: Marika Konings; gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Reminder: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft Initial Report Reminder – please send any further comments / edits by Tuesday 13 January at the latest. Thanks, Marika From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>> Date: Thursday 8 January 2015 05:19 To: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>> Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Deadline for review - 13 January - PI Draft Initial Report Dear All, Following yesterday’s meeting, please find attached a revised version of the Initial Report. Any additional issues for WG consideration need to be submittedby Tuesday 13 Januaryat the latest in order to be considered during next Wednesday’s meeting which will be scheduled for 90 minutes (starting time 19.30 UTC). To facilitate your review and discussion, please pay specific attention to the following edits / comments several of which have been highlighted in yellow in the document: * Page 9 – definition of Bottom up in a GNSO PDP. The latest version of this definition reads: ‘a fundamental principle of ICANN’s participation and policy development decision-making process whereby policy and organisational decisions and analysis originating from Stakeholders who participate in the process to the Board. The process is designed to and will ideally provide the equal opportunity for participation from all Stakeholders as practical and possible’. * Page 10 - new preliminary recommendation in relation to the policy & implementation principles * Page 10-14 – proposed edits to the policy & implementation principles * Page 15 – proposed definition of binding / non-binding * Page 17 – does sufficient need further definition? * Page 22 – should clarification be added that this is disagreements relating to policy/intent, rather than this person being expected to deal with all disagreements within the group? * Page 25-26 – What process(es) is (are) to be used for addressing implementation / policy issues raised by the IRT (charter question 4) - please review the ‘optional – not discussed by the WG yet' language * Page 26 – What role does the Board play, if any, in addressing implementation concerns from the GNSO Council? - please review the ‘optional – not discussed by the WG yet’ language * Page 81 – If the GNSO Council liaison makes the determination that there is consensus for such consideration, the following procedure applies: to be defined following WG agreement on the above Operating Principles. [Note, this could be updated to read ‘to be defined following community input on the proposed operating principles’?] If there are any other edits / comments you spot that you believe warrant further WG discussion, please share those with the list. As mentioned yesterday, due to the merger of different versions the attribution of certain comments / edits may have gotten lost or may have been wrongly attributed to me. Also, on page 22 it looks like edits were made on the same places by different people – I’ve tried to fix these as best as I could. If you still have further edits / suggestions, let me know. Please also find some notes from yesterday’s meeting below. Best regards, Marika Notes 7/1 Meeting: Public Comment Process: * Design it in a way that assist the WG to more readily review and analyse the comments * Asking for feedback in a questionnaire format (multiple choice or rating scale answers) * This would be in addition to the 'normal' public comment forum. Consider providing a template that can be used to submit comments. * Staff to put together a draft survey for WG review Next steps * For next meeting: circulate revised version, call out 'yelllow' items * Any other 'yellow' items that require WG review / discussion need to be submitted by Tuesday 13 January at the latest * Next week's meeting will start at 19.30 UTC and run for 90 minutes. Attachment:
PI Initial Report Updated - 14 January 2015.docx
|