[soac-mapo] Chat from today's call attached for your reference

[Liz Gasster <liz.gasster@xxxxxxxxx>]

All, following is the chat from today's call.  I'll be sending out a clean 
version of the draft Charter Terms of Reference shortly.

Best, Liz

CLO: Hi all
richard tindal: Hello
avri: hi
richard tindal: whats the election outcome in Oz?   still hung?
paul stahura: hello
Bertrand de La Chapelle: Hi everybody
CLO: Hello all
CLO: Yes @Richard  still Hung
ken stubbs: hello all
dirk krischenowski 2: hello from berlin
Jothan Frakes: hello everyone and I appreciate we can talk about this s**t
Jothan Frakes: (sort)
Alan Greenberg: We seem to have some sort of music and dishwashing in the 
background.
Jothan Frakes: of stuff
Robin Gross: correction: I'm not chair of NCSG
avri: Robin: i think she was saying that you are of the NCSG and chair of the 
NCUC
CLO: I'll  mention here if either Evan or Carlton want to get to the speaking 
list
ken stubbs: what was the last historical precedent ?
Alan Greenberg: ALAC tomorrow for most of us...
CLO: we in the antipodes are ahead of you all ;-)
Alan Greenberg: Goes without saying that most of us may be members of something 
but are here at the moment on our own behalf only.
CLO: indeed Alan
Gisella Gruber-White: Apologies from: Michele Neylon, Caroline Greer and 
Heather Dryden
CLO: Evan  wishes to speak
avri: we have joint SSac and GNSO , CCSNO and GNEO, ALAC and GNSO all going on 
now.
avri: in other cross community groups, we have gotten all the relevant SOAC to 
act as chartering organizations and to agree to the charter/ToR.
Bertrand de La Chapelle: support for including a reference to an ALAC position
CLO: We can make sure these BG docs  get linked to the Confluence Wiki page as 
well (ref to Evan's point)
avri: do we have this page yet?
Robin Gross: NCUC made some statements on Rec6 (minority reports) that we 
should add to the reference materials on the issue.
avri: yes, and it will be important to deal with the fact that GAC and ALAC 
advice are not in agreement.
Carlton Samuels: Yes indeed!
Jothan Frakes: +1 marilyn
ken stubbs: +1
Carlton Samuels: +1 to Marilyn's principle
CLO: Page is set up  but need the ToR's to finalise state to put up  then good 
to go
Bertrand de La Chapelle: but the joint ALAC-GAC sessions on that topic in 
Mexico, Nairobi (smaller group) and most importantly in Brussels showed very 
interesting interaction and maybe less misunderstanding that could be 
anticipated. Let's hope....
Jothan Frakes: so let's say hypothetically that we worked out the logistics of 
how we're represented in the first 45 minutes, what is the likelihood we might 
talk some substance?
ken stubbs: +1 council comment
CLO: I'll ask  Glen to send the list email details to IT for list subscribers 
to log into this page
Alan Greenberg: Both GAC and ALAC are generally against current wording, but 
not necessarily in agreement with where we should go next.
Jothan Frakes: Liz that sounded like it captured the benefit of Marilyn's 
suggestion
Bertrand de La Chapelle: you may be right, alan. Let's see how we collectively 
handle it.
avri: Alan: yes they seem to both want it changed, but seem to have a very 
different set of changes in mind.
Jothan Frakes: off topic:  Liz is awesome
Carlton Samuels: the thinking was 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend', not a 
bosom pal
Jothan Frakes: deserves some kudos for some last minute heroism leading into 
this call in getting this document together
Carlton Samuels: we ALAC are looking for allies that are firstly opposed on the 
principle but the priority of the premises for opposition may differ
avri: yes, iwas the new gtld - that is what they were called in that report
Alan Greenberg: There should be a reference to the GNSO policy document and the 
specific principle/rec. in a footnote.
avri: we just need a reference to explain that
richard tindal: yes,  by all means lets footnote the actual principle or 
recommendation
Jon N: wow -- only 3 years ago!
Bertrand de La Chapelle: support Marilyn's idea. We could say for instance ''as 
noted in recommendation 4 of Reference document 1 above'')
avri: Jon 3 and counting
Jothan Frakes: lol Jon.   New TLD years work exactly opposite of how Dog years 
do
Bill Drake: Preserving doesn't work
Alan Greenberg: Universal resolvability is not an ICANN principle, but the 
concept of using blocking to address issues has generally been something that 
we do NOT advocate or even mention.
Alan Greenberg: that should have been blocking of ''names''
richard tindal: Bertrands proposal is sensible
CLO: I'm comfortable with that approach of @Bertrand
Robin Gross: no international standards
Bill Drake: agreed
Gisella Gruber-White: Please state your names before speaking for transcript 
purposes - especially with the large number of participants - thank you!
Mary W: Rec 6 does NOT necessarily assume there are such universal standards, 
only that - to the extent there are (and some of us do not think there are) - 
that strings not contravene them. In other words, Rec 6 is pretty open-ended 
and does not rest on an assumption that there is, or can be, a definition for 
MAPO.
paul stahura: i agree with changing ''recommend'' to ''consider''
Bertrand de La Chapelle: Consider is good. could it be ''consider possible 
alternative formulations than universal principles of morality and public 
order''
Alan Greenberg: Technically, according to the ICANN Bylaws, I am not a GNSO 
Councillor, so perhaps I could be forgiven. Not did I have a vote at the time 
it was approved.
Mary W: I agree with Avri 100%
Bill Drake: Me too but even illegal can be dicey
Robin Gross: at least ''illegal'' would be objective
Mary W: It's at least more precise (for the most part) and less subjective, 
Bill.
Robin Gross: we need objective standards
Stuart Lawley- ICM: I agree with Avri but the GAc is coming from a whole 
different direction on this
Bill Drake: Legal in country x?
Robin Gross: sensitivities is too broad, too vague - too subjective
Robin Gross: Bill, Legal in the country that applies in the situation
Mary W: It was from the GAC
Bill Drake: So if Pakistani courts rule .drawmohammed to be illegal because 
it's sensitive, what's the difference?
Mary W: And then the Danish courts rule that it's sensitive but NOT illegal ...
Alan Greenberg: There was a huge discussion in the GNSO at the time about 
illegal and eventually it as decided that it was unworkable.
Robin Gross: it is no different than the current law and practice - if it is 
illegal, registrars won't do it.
avri: Tat was why we came up with the MaPO compromise.
richard tindal: I think Bertrand's idea has potential
Robin Gross: I disagree the GNSO decided it was ''unworkable'' to allow 
national law to govern.
Bertrand de La Chapelle: it would be : ''2. Consider possible alternative 
formulations to the term ''international principles of morality and public 
order'' used in the DAG''
richard tindal: Good for me
Bertrand de La Chapelle: mary's proposal is elegant
Mary W: Ooh I feel good :)
Stéphane Van Gelder: On excellent form as usual Mary, well done ;)
Jothan Frakes: Nice one Mary
Mary W: Awww u guys ... thx
Robin Gross: At-Large & NCUC have objected to Rec 6 from the beginning also.
Robin Gross: I also believe the statement be there to show ICANN will adhere to 
principles of international law - not only bylaws.
Stéphane Van Gelder: Robin, NCUC is part of the GNSO Council is it not? The 
GNSO recommendations were adopted by a supermajority vote of the Council...
avri: Stéphane - are you saying that once a vote is taken in the GNSO, no one 
can disagree with it and bring up the issues they had with it?  ie. that the 
GNSO must have a unified front attitude.
Robin Gross: can I get in queue please?
Stuart Lawley- ICM: the statement is in ICANNS articles of incorporation NOt 
its bylaws
Stéphane Van Gelder: No. I am reacting to the comment, from a GNSO 
constituency, that ''we were against this all along''...
Alan Greenberg: And they were!  Just a statement of fact.
Bertrand de La Chapelle: Stuart is right. I said it in the commentary : it is 
Article 4 of the Articles of Incorporation
Alan Greenberg: Not a Bylaw!!  Bylaws can be changes by us alone, Articles of 
Incorporation have more rigidity.
Robin Gross: but Stephane, we were against this along!
Robin Gross: we lost, but we were against it all along!
avri: sorry i got that wrong - bylaws vs. Articles.  i think my point still 
holds.  and we mention very rarely that we plan to live up to them.
Bill Drake: It's worth saying this, in some intergovernmental settings there've 
been questions raised as to whether ICANN complies with international law.
Stéphane Van Gelder: OK, thanks Robin, I did not realize the NCUC was against 
it all along.
Robin Gross: Thanks, Stephane, then I guess I didn't do a good job of making 
folks aware of it?  :-)
avri: Stéphen some not only voted against the new gTLD recommendations, but 
also filed a minority report.
Stuart Lawley- ICM: @Bill: the IRP definitely ruled that icann was subject to 
international law
avri: i mean Stéphane . apologies
Stéphane Van Gelder: Avri, was there one from the NCUC on Rec6?
avri: a minority statement?  yes
Stéphane Van Gelder: no prob Bertrand ;)
Robin Gross: Stephane, NCUC Statement on Rec 6: 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm#_Toc48210873
Stéphane Van Gelder: Thanks to you both, Avri and Robin
Bertrand de La Chapelle: @Bill : I encourage you  - if you have not done it - 
to read the relevant part of the IRP auditions. Very interesting debate.
Robin Gross: and an earlier NCUC statement against Rec 6: 
http://ipjustice.org/wp/2008/02/20/domain-names-are-bigger-than-trademarks-icanns-new-consumer-protection-role/
richard tindal: nice job Chuck
richard tindal: and all
Stéphane Van Gelder: I have read the first statement and I stand corrected, the 
NCUC was indeed very clear in its opposition.
Robin Gross: sorry, the last link was on trademarks, not mapo
Bertrand de La Chapelle: nice job
Jothan Frakes: thank you everyone
Mary W: See you all soon and thanks!
Robin Gross: thank you all - good start
Stéphane Van Gelder: Thanks to all, well done the co-chairs!
CLO: If we can have the edits FINALISED for the ToR's  OK for the ALAC meeting 
at 1400 UTC please  that would be VERY helful for our Agenda
CLO: Thanks everyone
Liz Gasster: yes, please send link to ALAC statement and I can do now
Liz Gasster: send out again at least...
CLO: I'v e sent that as an AI to our staff  chat
avri: Stéphane btw, i was not part of the NCUC at that time, though i do recall 
as i was chairing at the time
CLO: Matthias should pick that up  but  just insert a placeholder for now Liz
Liz Gasster: ok

Liz Gasster
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN