FW: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members

[Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

ICA is fine with focusing primarily on new gTLDs, notwithstanding our 
differences with some of the BC rights protection positions.

While not strictly on the AOC, and perhaps not a topic for extended discussion 
with the Board at this particular meeting, I think that all BC members should 
think about how ICANN meetings should best be structured to take into account 
the new reality of substantially increased GAC involvement in the policy 
process. The Board and the GAC now plan two days of meetings in San Francisco 
on new gTLDs (and also, presumably, .xxx) -- on Tuesday, Constituency Day, and 
on Thursday, which is usually devoted to a lengthy public forum. As there are 
so many hours in a day, the time the Board huddles with the GAC is time that 
they cannot interact with constituencies or with the community -- plus they 
will naturally be more focused mentally on the meetings with the GAC. While 
there are unlikely to be issues of the same intensity as new gTLDs in the 
immediate future, GAC members made it quite clear that they want to be involved 
in future policy issues from the beginning, and that the form of discussion 
with the Board taking place now is setting a precedent.

So I think we should all assume that ICANN meetings in the future will either 
be longer, or differently structured, and have some internal discussion about 
what revised format would best serve business users.




Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal

Virtualaw LLC

1155 F Street, NW

Suite 1050

Washington, DC 20004

202-559-8597/Direct

202-559-8750/Fax

202-255-6172/cell



"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey



________________________________________
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Philip 
Sheppard [philip.sheppard@xxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:42 AM
To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] Input needed from all members

Support focusing on TLDs only.

Philip ....

... who very nicely did NOT reply to all and thus saved 5 BC members from
duplicate mails.

Will the next BC member be as kind to me ?