April 2016 - Accountability-Cross-Community

Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 27 April @ 04:00 UTC
by MSSI Secretariat April 25, 2016

April 25, 2016

Dear All, In preparation for your call, CCWG Accountability Meeting #92 <https://community.icann.org/x/mCeAAw> - Wednesday, 27 April at 04:00 - 06:00 UTC (time converter<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG+Accountabilit…>), see below proposed agenda: Proposed Agenda: 1. Welcome, roll call, SOI 2. Timeline for CCWG Comment on Draft Bylaws - Apr 27th : CCWG ACCT Meeting #92 - May 3rd : CCWG ACCT Meeting #93 - May 10th : Submission 3. Introductory remarks from Holly and Rosemary 4. Q&A 5. [Tentative] ICANN Legal discussion on 1.1 6. AOB Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/ Thank you! With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

1 0

Draft New ICANN Bylaws Posted for Public Comment
by Hillary Jett April 21, 2016

April 21, 2016

Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-04-21-en Draft New ICANN Bylaws Posted for 30-day Public Comment Now that the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) and Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) proposals have been transmitted to NTIA, one of the key implementation planning items is to amend the ICANN Bylaws to reflect the recommendations in those Proposals. The proposed draft of the New ICANN Bylaws was developed collaboratively by the ICANN legal team and the independent counsel hired to advise the CCWG-Accountability and the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship). In developing the Draft New ICANN Bylaws, the attorneys consulted a Bylaws Coordination Group populated with both community and Board members, as well as with the CWG-Stewardship and the CCWG-Accountability. Both the independent counsel to the community groups and ICANN's General Counsel have confirmed that the Draft New ICANN Bylaws are consistent with the community proposals relating to the IANA Stewardship Transition. These proposed draft Bylaws, are out for a 30-day public comment from 21 April – 21 May to allow any interested party to review and provide feedback. This timeline allows for comments to be analyzed and incorporated in time for a tentative 27 May adoption of the Bylaws by the ICANN Board. NTIA has stated that it needs to see that changes to the Bylaws have been adopted sufficient to implement the Transition Proposals before NTIA can complete its review of the Transition Proposals. This public comment period is designed to meet that deadline. Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-new-bylaws-2016-04-21-en -- Hillary Jett Communications Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403 Email: hillary.jett(a)icann.org

2 1

Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Question to lawyers/Co-Chairs
by Seun Ojedeji April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

Hello Mathieu, May I know if the timeline you provided remains the status-quo or are we to expect a new update on timeline? I am asking because I haven't seen the publication of the bylaw draft for PC yet. (Will appreciate pointers if that is not the case) Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 18 Apr 2016 03:30, "Mathieu Weill" <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr> wrote: Seun, All, Apologies for the delay in responding. Following an exchange with the Bylaws coordination group, the latest update on milestones is as follows : - A new Bylaw draft should be produced by lawyers and circulated to the Bylaws coordination group by tomorrow (Tuesday 19th) - Our legal team should be able to produce a memo to confirm compliance with our report within 48 hours from that date - The CCWG discussion / approval based on these inputs would therefore take place during the public comment period which is expected to start on Apr 20th. I hope this is helpful. Best Mathieu *De :* accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org] *De la part de* Seun Ojedeji *Envoyé :* mercredi 13 avril 2016 10:11 *À :* accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org *Objet :* [CCWG-ACCT] Question to lawyers/Co-Chairs Dear Co-Chairs, I understand that the goal of this process is ONLY supposed to reflect update to the bylaw that has been proposed in our report. Inview of this, I like to ask 2 questions: 1. During one of our previous call, I specifically asked when is it that the lawyers will come back with a certified bylaw draft. You indicated that you will get back to me and since I have not seen an update on that, I like to know the status? And also like to know if this delay would imply update on the timeline as I don't think the timeline is at all feasible again 2. I will like to ask that apart from the lawyers confirming that the bylaw is consistent with our proposal, that it also be confirmed that NO other update/changes has been done on the bylaw apart from those related to this transition as reflected in the respective proposals. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos

1 0

TR: [bylaws-coord] Explanation of grandfathered agreements
by Mathieu Weill April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

Dear Colleagues, Please find attached a memo from our lawyers, in response to our request regarding Section 1.1 (d) of the Bylaws (so called "grandfathering" provisions). Best, Mathieu -----Message d'origine----- De : bylaws-coord-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces@icann.org] De la part de Rosemary E. Fei Envoyé : mercredi 20 avril 2016 10:05 À : bylaws-coord(a)icann.org Cc : ICANN-Adler; Daniel Halloran (daniel.halloran(a)icann.org) Sidley ICANN CCWG (sidleyicannccwg(a)sidley.com) Amy Stathos (amy.stathos(a)icann.org) Objet : [bylaws-coord] Explanation of grandfathered agreements Dear Bylaws Coordination Group: During the CCWG call on April 12, Mathieu noted that, in order to approve the proposed Bylaws, the CCWG would need an explanation for the unanimous decision among the Sidley and Adler firms and ICANN Legal to include specified agreements and the current Strategic and Operating Plans in the list of "grandfathered" documents in Section 1.1(d)(ii) of the draft Bylaws circulated on April 7, 2016. The explanation, approved by all three counsels, is attached, in Word and pdf formats. Please distribute to the full CCWG list, if you deem that appropriate. Please let us know if you need any further information on this point. Rosemary, Holly, and John

3 3

DNS
by Kavouss Arasteh April 19, 2016

April 19, 2016

If ICANN does not coordinate the allocation and assignments of names in the domain name system then who does that? What is the situations today, who perform that task? Kavouss

8 15

Question to lawyers/Co-Chairs
by Seun Ojedeji April 18, 2016

April 18, 2016

Dear Co-Chairs, I understand that the goal of this process is ONLY supposed to reflect update to the bylaw that has been proposed in our report. Inview of this, I like to ask 2 questions: 1. During one of our previous call, I specifically asked when is it that the lawyers will come back with a certified bylaw draft. You indicated that you will get back to me and since I have not seen an update on that, I like to know the status? And also like to know if this delay would imply update on the timeline as I don't think the timeline is at all feasible again 2. I will like to ask that apart from the lawyers confirming that the bylaw is consistent with our proposal, that it also be confirmed that NO other update/changes has been done on the bylaw apart from those related to this transition as reflected in the respective proposals. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos

2 1

24h left! Public Comment on Principles for CCWGs
by Grace Abuhamad April 15, 2016

April 15, 2016

Dear all, The Public Comment period for the CCWG-Principles draft closes on 16 April 2016 at 23:59 UTC. You now have a bit more than 24 hours to submit comments: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-…. There are some comments already in the forum that are worth reading: https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ccwg-framework-principles-22feb16/. Thank you again to our CCWG-ACCT and CWG-IANA participants who took the time to submit comments, including: France, Carlos Raul, James, Jorge, Seun, and Mathieu. I am hoping to see more comments from names familiar in the CWG-IANA and CCWG-ACCT :) -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE. From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, March 28, 2016 at 2:51 PM To: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Subject: Extended Public Comment on Principles for CCWGs Dear all, The Public Comment period for the CCWG-Principles draft has been extended to 16 April 2016. You now have 19 days to submit comments: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-…. Thank you to James, Jorge, and Seun who have followed Mathieu’s lead and submitted comments. In the next 19 days, I am hoping to see more comments from CWG-IANA and CCWG-ACCT volunteers :) Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE. From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, March 21, 2016 at 12:09 PM To: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Subject: Reminder: 12 days left to comment on Principles for CCWGs Dear all, Just a quick note to remind you that there are 12 days left to submit comments on the draft framework principles for cross community working groups: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-…. As of right now, only one comment has been submitted (by our faithful CCWG-Accountability co-Chair Mathieu Weill, no less!). If you need a review of what this is all about, my original impassioned note is below :) Best, Grace -- Grace Abuhamad Manager, Public Policy ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 801 17th Street NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 Direct: +1 202 249 7545 | Mobile: +1 310 200 7638 Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE. STAY UPDATED. FOLLOW. ENGAGE. From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 6:14 PM To: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> Cc: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles for CCWGs -- Public Comment Dear CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability members, participants, and observers, I’m writing to request your expert feedback for the public comment on the draft framework principles for cross community working groups: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-framework-principles-draft-2016-…. I’ve attached the draft to the email for your convenience. Why you? You are the experts. You are the past, the present, and the future of cross community working groups at ICANN. You have survived one (or both) of the big IANA Stewardship Transition working groups over the past two years, and you probably (I hope!) have a lot to reflect upon and share. What’s the point? There are no agreed community-wide guidelines on the use of CCWGs, but they are such an awesome form of multistakeholder policymaking that the ICANN community is increasingly reliant on CCWGs for their policy efforts. The CCWG-Principles has taken on the task of developing a uniform framework of principles intended to guide the formation, initiation, operations and closure of future CCWGs. How much time do I have? The public comment period opened on Monday this week. You have 39 days left, until 23 April at 23:59 UTC. You could jot down some thoughts during your long plane rides to/from Marrakech, or even as you observe the action during the sessions! The email to which your comments may be sent is: <comments-ccwg-framework-principles-22feb16(a)icann.org>. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Wong (cc’ed here). I am passionate about this work because we’ve innovated and learned so much from the IANA Stewardship Transition working groups, and I have had the privilege and opportunity to work with both groups from their formation. I am keen to see where the outcome of this public comment period takes us next, and I very much hope that you will take pride in designing that path forward. —Grace

1 0

CCWG - Bylaws Drafting - Answers to some of the remaining questions.
by Bernard Turcotte April 15, 2016

April 15, 2016

All, The CCWG leadership met on April 14th to consider the CCWG responses to the remaining open questions (including re-framing of Q33 by R.Fei in her email) Please find attached the answers to all remaining questions except the following: - Additional Question 12 (Mission and Regulation) is pending a response from lawyers on alternatives proposed by BBurr - Additional question 14 on Section 1.1 (d) will require a special meeting as discussed at the CCWG meeting of 12 April. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG Co-Chairs Thomas Rickert, Mathieu Weill, Leon Snachez

4 4

CCWG - Answers to questions and issues
by Bernard Turcotte April 14, 2016

April 14, 2016

All, Please find attached the CCWG's answers to questions and issues (some of which originated from the CCWG). These include answers to CCWG generated questions and issues which affect the Bylaws drafting and as such should be considered by the drafting team. There are a few questions which remain and these will be considered by the CCWG urgently. Bernard Turcotte ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG Co-Chairs: Mathieu Weill, Thomas Rickert and Leon Sanchez

5 4

Sockpuppy gets an injunction
by Dr Eberhard W Lisse April 13, 2016

April 13, 2016

Michele, It's much deeper. I think that DCA has no claim to .AFRICA, whatsoever, but, they have the right to be treated fairly AND to challenge ICANN's conduct. And THAT is what this Preliminary Injunction is about. Whether DCA can prevail on the merits or (most certainly) not, they have some very compelling arguments, such as: A monopolist awarding a contract that only it can award only under the condition that you can not sue them for whatever reason (which is very wide and includes, technically, intent, which DCA is using, hence they HAVE to allege intent, ie fraud) is not only amoral (as I have said before) but it also may violate (Californian) law. In the current proceedings DCA have led evidence in this regards which ICANN had opportunity to contradict by its own evidence. The Court, decided that the balance of probability on the evidence (submitted by DCA and ICANN) favored DCA. This may well change in the main action because there/then the burden of proof is higher. ICANN has tried to present the Court with a fait accompli, by trying to delegate during this Court case. Courts don't like this as a general rule from a fairness perspective, and I read the Order as the Court being displeased. It is indeed unfair to DCA and as little as I am a fanboy of Sockpuppy, I am a very firm believer in fundamental fairness. Never mind that the justification given by ICANN sounds silly. Which is another issue. Either is Jones Day stupid and/or arrogant or ICANN is resistant to JD's advice. Or both, of course. The delay is clearly caused by ICANN, whether by ineptness (as I suspect) or intentionally (as alleged by DCA). I think the AUC issue is a red herring, but the IRP comments are also worrying. Now, this is just a Preliminary Injunction to maintain the status quo ante, but it does support what I have been concerned about with regards to ICANN's Accountability and the Transition. I remain unconvinced that the measures proposed by the CCWG Accountability could prevent this challenged conduct from happening. greetings, el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini 4 > On 13 Apr 2016, at 22:28, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele(a)blacknight.com> wrote: > > Maybe when it’s reported somewhere as opposed to just a press release .. > > In any case I don’t see how this ridiculous case dragging on and on and on helps anyone > > Maybe ICANN should simply give the applicants the strings they originally applied for – this would solve the problem and there’d be no conflicts > > Regards > > Michele > > -- > Mr Michele Neylon > [...]

3 2