On 14/01/2016 06:15, Steve DelBianco wrote:
isn't it true that AoC items 3a, 3b, and 3c map directly to AoC reviews 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3 ?
AoC item 3 begins "3. This document affirms key commitments by DOC and ICANN, including commitments to ..." By contrast, successive clauses begin: "4. DOC affirms... 5. DOC recognises... 6. DOC also affirms... 7. ICANN commits... 8. ICANN affirms... 9. Recognising that [some stuff], ICANN affirms..." So we have six clauses where the active verb explicitly has either ICANN or the DOC as the actor (the subject, in grammatical terms), and one clause where "this document" is the subject. That looks to me very much like item 3 is a chapeau, merely introducing, describing and explaining the clauses that follow in "this document". As a textual matter, I find it very hard to read it as introducing wholly additional commitments, that are not elaborated in one of the following clauses. I'm not all that keen on inviting parties to a document such as this to interpret it after the event: the document should be interpreted objectively, as saying what it says on its face. But since we have decided to invite the NTIA to give their view, we need to be very precise in the question we ask them. Here is my initial suggestion, for the group's review: "In the opinion of the NTIA, does clause 3 of the AoC serve only to introduce, explain and interpret the commitments affirmed in clauses 4-11, or does it also create a separate affirmation of additional commitments beyond those elaborated elsewhere in the document?". Kind Regards, Malcolm. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London EC3R 8AJ Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA