I object, and I think many others objected, to the idea that advice from inhouse (i.e., ICANN legal) should be the "default."  We retained independent counsel to the CCWG for good reasons, and those reasons are still applicable today.  I hope we don't need to rehash that.

We need the continued ability and discretion to go directly to CCWG's counsel.  Requesting inhouse to solicit an opinion from an external counsel is not only "cumbersome," it's absolutely antithetical to the relationship between CCWG and its independent counsel.

I strongly believe that the "default" must be the status quo, i.e., that the CCWG (through reasonable processes) has the ability and discretion to turn to its own counsel.  Further, I strongly believe that CCWG's independent counsel must remain Sidley Austin and Adler & Colvin.  They have been up a tremendous learning curve and worked with us every step of the way.  It would be folly to cast that aside.  It's worth noting that Sidley is a full-service law firm with offices outside the US in Beijing, Brussels, Geneva, Hong Kong, London, Munich, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney and Tokyo.  I'm confident that Sidley (and Adler) will (a) tell us when they don't have the expertise to help us, and (b) work with us on working methods to make our use of the firms more cost-effective. 

Greg

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel@gmail.com> wrote:
Based on comments on the call today, IMO; A good body of knowledge was accquired on the subject of legal requests in wg1. WG2 legal resources would be both inhouse and external, from start, We should be much more efficient this time around. Each sub however will have their needs and there may be requests applicable across the subgroups and/or specific to a subgroup.
So, that suggests close relationship between budget control and the former legal request team [reconfigured and/or augmented] who would have to coordinate requests across ws2 sub 
groups as i see it.
What determines the initial choice inhouse/external resources may be a matter of consensus, but it may be prudent to consider the process as [default] inhouse with the flexible and necessary option of external sources by consensus [as the fog clears so to speak]. I think it may be cumbersome to request inhouse to solicit an opinion from an external,  because there may arise an instance where; on the strength of an opinion, [inhouse or external] ; a wg2 may wish to reframe and seek alternative advise elswhere.
rd



On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Vinay Kesari <vinay.kesari@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,

I was unfortunately unable to join the call as I was on a flight at the time, my apologies. I've just had a chance to catch up on the Adobe Connect recording, and I'm happy to reconfirm my willingness and availability to serve as a rapporteur. Also, I agree with the thrust of Kavouss' comment at 0:24:30, and affirm my commitment to serve impartially. I look forward to working with Greg on the jurisdiction subgroup.

Separately, on the issue of allocation of legal requests, I agree that we need further discussion, and endorse creating an Option 3 based on the points made and the specific requirements of the different WS2 subgroups.

Regards,
Vinay


On 12 July 2016 at 20:55, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

 

Attached is a short set of slides to support our discussion on agenda item #4

 

Talk to you in a few hours

Mathieu

 

De : accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] De la part de MSSI Secretariat
Envoyé : lundi 11 juillet 2016 19:46
À : CCWG-Accountability
Objet : [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC

 

Good day all,

In preparation for your call, CCWG Accountability WS2 Meeting #2 – Tuesday, 12 July @ 20:00 – 22:00 UTC.  Time zone converter here     

Proposed Agenda:

1.        Welcome, SOI

2.        Articles of Incorporation : finalize submission 

3.        Appointment of rapporteurs for WS2 – next steps 

4.        Legal Cost Control Mechanism : initial discussion 

5.        AOB

6.        Closing

 

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

 


_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community



_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community