My suggested changes are marked in track changes on top of Becky's changes. Most were typos or wording changes to improve clarity. Greg On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:

On 2015-07-30 22:07, Burr, Becky wrote:

...

Sending again

Thank you again Becky.

Best,

Malcolm.

J. Beckwith Burr

...

NEUSTAR, INC. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer

1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006

Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz

From: <Burr>, Becky Burr <becky.burr@neustar.biz> Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] FW: [WP2] IRP text from Initial Draft Report revised to reflect our work

These are the current docs

J. Beckwith Burr

NEUSTAR, INC. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer

1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006

Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz

-- 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 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY

Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA

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

Yes, but it will need to wait until later this evening. Hard to keep track of the criss-crossing drafts. Greg On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org> wrote:

Greg — is it possible for you to merge your edits/comments into the consolidated draft that Becky and Malcolm just shared?

From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 7:20 PM To: Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> Cc: Accountability Cross Community < accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IRP text following call with Malcolm

My suggested changes are marked in track changes on top of Becky's changes. Most were typos or wording changes to improve clarity.

Greg

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:

...

On 2015-07-30 22:07, Burr, Becky wrote:

...

Sending again

Thank you again Becky.

Best,

Malcolm.

J. Beckwith Burr

...

NEUSTAR, INC. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer

1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006

Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz

From: <Burr>, Becky Burr <becky.burr@neustar.biz> Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] FW: [WP2] IRP text from Initial Draft Report revised to reflect our work

These are the current docs

J. Beckwith Burr

NEUSTAR, INC. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer

1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006

Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / becky.burr@neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz

-- 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 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY

Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA

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

What new ideas are you referring to? On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:

Correcting typos is fine, but I believe the Chair announced that we are past the point of introducing new ideas that haven't been agreed by the working party.

...

On 31 Jul 2015, at 00:20, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

My suggested changes are marked in track changes on top of Becky's changes. Most were typos or wording changes to improve clarity.

On 31/07/2015 05:30, Greg Shatan wrote:

A consolidated draft with changes from Becky, Malcolm and myself is attached. Given where we are in the process, I have included marginal comments explaining any change I made that was more than punctuation or a typo. I don't think any of the changes represent "new ideas" but there are a couple of places where the original idea was rather obscure so I attempted to clarify it.

Thank you for your explanations Greg. Mostly I accept them, but I do have two where I disagree with making the changes for which you ask. 1. You added "*specify the provisions violated in the relevant documents*" in the following passage (under "Decision Making") that sets out duties for the IRP panel: "All decisions will be documented and made public and will reflect a well-reasoned application of the standard to be applied *and will specify the provisions violated in the relevant documents* (i.e., Bylaws, the Statement of Mission, Commitments, and Core Values, and ICANN policies)." I disagree with your explanation that without this wording the existing language makes no sense: it may not be perfect legalese, but the parenthetical clear elaborates on the preceeding "the standard to be applied") Instead of merely clarifying, your additional language adds a new duty: not one I particularly object to, but it is new: that the panel's decisions must not only be real reasoned but must also explicitly identify the provisions ICANN has violated. Your wording here however doesn't quite work: it assumes that the IRP will be finding against ICANN. The IRP will not be able to comply with your requirement when finding in ICANN's favour. Accordingly, this addition can't be accepted. 2. You made a separate paragraph of the following: "The panel may not direct the Board or ICANN on how to amend specific decisions, it shall only be able to make decisions that confirm a decision by ICANN, or cancel a decision, totally or in parts" separating it from the section on appeals. That language, which was original and unchanged by our final draft, seems to have slipped through. You're correct to point out that it doesn't seem to relate to appeals, but I would also point out that it is inconsistent with one of our other recommendations: "The CCWG-Accountability further recommends that ithe decisional Panel also have the power to require ICANN to take a decision or action consistent with the Panel’s decision on an interim basis, until the Board has had a chance to consider and decide how to implement an IRP Panel decision" (from the section on Decision) I therefore think the proper correction to this sentence is to delete it, rather than "promote it" to become a paragraph of its own. For convenience, attached is Greg's paper minus those two proposed additions. -- 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 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA