community powers comparison: designator & membership model - what powers can we create and how to enforce them?
Hello Team, What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly. But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means. So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side. The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo... I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play. Thanks, Robin
Robin, Thank you for this. A great deal of effort clearly went into this and this should develop into a very useful tool. However, I think we will need to have this reviewed by legal counsel before we rely on it. Having reviewed this briefly, I am uncertain that at this stage this document accurately captures the legal advice, particularly with regard to how the rights can be enforced. Specifically, this seems to give the impression that, if the membership model were chosen, the members would be limited to running off to court in most cases should rights need to be enforced. I'm fairly confident that is not the case. I believe that the remedies listed for the designator model, particularly changes to the bylaws and the IRP, are equally available in the member model. With regard to litigation, I think the distinction is that the designators have no ability to litigate on behalf of the corporation, while this is one possibility (but far from the only one) available to members. In other words, such litigation is an extra power, not the only power, available to members. The Legal Sub Team (copied here) should discuss how to proceed. Thank you again for taking the laboring oar in pulling this together! Best regards, Greg On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Hello Team,
What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly.
But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means.
So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side.
The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo...
I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Thanks, Greg. I actually agree that the kind of intra-enforcement mechanisms needed that are short of a lawsuit could be created for either model. This could be the right place for an Independent Appeals Process - so these specific rights could be enforced by internal mechanisms without the need to go to a court as surely this is preferred in either model and should considered by both models at play. It is becoming clearer that we may need that process with either model to resolve these disputes. Thanks, Robin On Apr 14, 2015, at 12:19 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:
Robin,
Thank you for this. A great deal of effort clearly went into this and this should develop into a very useful tool. However, I think we will need to have this reviewed by legal counsel before we rely on it. Having reviewed this briefly, I am uncertain that at this stage this document accurately captures the legal advice, particularly with regard to how the rights can be enforced.
Specifically, this seems to give the impression that, if the membership model were chosen, the members would be limited to running off to court in most cases should rights need to be enforced. I'm fairly confident that is not the case. I believe that the remedies listed for the designator model, particularly changes to the bylaws and the IRP, are equally available in the member model. With regard to litigation, I think the distinction is that the designators have no ability to litigate on behalf of the corporation, while this is one possibility (but far from the only one) available to members. In other words, such litigation is an extra power, not the only power, available to members.
The Legal Sub Team (copied here) should discuss how to proceed.
Thank you again for taking the laboring oar in pulling this together!
Best regards,
Greg
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote: Hello Team,
What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly.
But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means.
So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side.
The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo...
I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Fantastic work Robin and much appreciated! I echo Greg's comments concerning the role of litigation in both models. I do like the format and I think it would be a great idea to have it reviewed and improved upon, if necessary, by counsel, for distribution to the general list. Best, Ed On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 8:19 PM, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5@icann.org> wrote:
Robin,
Thank you for this. A great deal of effort clearly went into this and this should develop into a very useful tool. However, I think we will need to have this reviewed by legal counsel before we rely on it. Having reviewed this briefly, I am uncertain that at this stage this document accurately captures the legal advice, particularly with regard to how the rights can be enforced.
Specifically, this seems to give the impression that, if the membership model were chosen, the members would be limited to running off to court in most cases should rights need to be enforced. I'm fairly confident that is not the case. I believe that the remedies listed for the designator model, particularly changes to the bylaws and the IRP, are equally available in the member model. With regard to litigation, I think the distinction is that the designators have no ability to litigate on behalf of the corporation, while this is one possibility (but far from the only one) available to members. In other words, such litigation is an extra power, not the only power, available to members.
The Legal Sub Team (copied here) should discuss how to proceed.
Thank you again for taking the laboring oar in pulling this together!
Best regards,
Greg
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Hello Team,
What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly.
But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means.
So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side.
The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo...
I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list Ccwg-accountability5@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5
Hello Robin, all, thank you for putting this together. This is very helpful. I echo your request for everyone to take a look at the table. At the same time, am I correct in understanding that the group will focus on these two options only? In other words, if there is anyone in the group who wishes to look at other models, too, please make yourself heard. Thanks, Thomas --- rickert.net
Am 14.04.2015 um 20:35 schrieb Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org>:
Hello Team,
What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly.
But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means.
So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side.
The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo...
I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play.
Thanks, Robin <GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.pdf> <GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.xlsx>
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Robin, dear Thomas, dear all, thank you Robin for breaking down the two models into an easier-to-digest table. It seems to be a very helpful tool for comparing the membership and designator model. Additionally, I’d like to pull focus on an issue that seems to be a prerequisite to both models. For a membership structure, members need to be either natural persons or legal entities. The same was recommended by counsel for the designator option. If I recall correctly there was some doubt expressed on yesterday’s call if a potentially necessary incorporation of the current SO’s is a step that would be tenable for everyone. I would thus like to echo Thomas’ request for input not just on the designator/membership comparison but also other possible approaches. Thank you, Sabine Sabine Meyer International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn GERMANY Phone: +49 228 99615-2948 Fax: + 49 228 99615-2964 E-Mail: sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de<mailto:sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de> Internet: http://www.bmwi.de<http://www.bmwi.de/> Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Thomas Rickert Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. April 2015 21:23 An: Robin Gross Cc: Accountability Cross Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] community powers comparison: designator & membership model - what powers can we create and how to enforce them? Hello Robin, all, thank you for putting this together. This is very helpful. I echo your request for everyone to take a look at the table. At the same time, am I correct in understanding that the group will focus on these two options only? In other words, if there is anyone in the group who wishes to look at other models, too, please make yourself heard. Thanks, Thomas --- rickert.net<http://rickert.net> Am 14.04.2015 um 20:35 schrieb Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>>: Hello Team, What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly. But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means. So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side. The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo... I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play. Thanks, Robin <GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.pdf> <GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.xlsx> _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
All, The legal sub team reviewed this chart and made a number of changes to it. The second draft was submitted to counsel for review and correction, as well as to answer several questions that have been added to the chart. A copy of the second draft is attached for the information of the group. While this draft is an advancement over the first draft, it cannot be completely relied upon until we have counsel's revisions. Greg On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 1:42 AM, <Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de> wrote:
Dear Robin, dear Thomas, dear all,
thank you Robin for breaking down the two models into an easier-to-digest table. It seems to be a very helpful tool for comparing the membership and designator model. Additionally, I’d like to pull focus on an issue that seems to be a prerequisite to both models. For a membership structure, members need to be either natural persons or legal entities. The same was recommended by counsel for the designator option.
If I recall correctly there was some doubt expressed on yesterday’s call if a potentially necessary incorporation of the current SO’s is a step that would be tenable for everyone. I would thus like to echo Thomas’ request for input not just on the designator/membership comparison but also other possible approaches.
Thank you,
Sabine
Sabine Meyer
International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance
Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn
GERMANY
Phone: +49 228 99615-2948
Fax: + 49 228 99615-2964
E-Mail: sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de
Internet: http://www.bmwi.de
*Von:* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Thomas Rickert *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 14. April 2015 21:23 *An:* Robin Gross *Cc:* Accountability Cross Community *Betreff:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] community powers comparison: designator & membership model - what powers can we create and how to enforce them?
Hello Robin, all,
thank you for putting this together. This is very helpful.
I echo your request for everyone to take a look at the table.
At the same time, am I correct in understanding that the group will focus on these two options only? In other words, if there is anyone in the group who wishes to look at other models, too, please make yourself heard.
Thanks,
Thomas
---
rickert.net
Am 14.04.2015 um 20:35 schrieb Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org>:
Hello Team,
What we need to do is take a hard look at both the membership model and the designator model and understand what rights can be created and how will they be enforced. Once we understand what we *can* do, we need to look at the pros/cons of the different models and evaluate accordingly.
But first, we need to understand what *can* be done so we can discuss *if* we ought to do it and what is the best means.
So I've taken a first pass of each of the 6 community empowerment goals and created a comparison table to lay-out what rights can be created and how they can be enforced. I've combed through all the 200+ pages of legal memos, today's CCWG call, and calls of the legal sub-team to compile this info into one table so the models can begin to be evaluated side-by-side.
The doc is attached and also here is a link to the table comparing the 2 models:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kkkRBpMUkTpD5_RP_Ogo1PTGzGt2kC6f1xoo...
I am hopeful it can begin to help us to wrap our minds around what our goals are and how they could be accomplished by the two models at play.
Thanks, Robin
<GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.pdf>
<GovernanceModelsCommunityPowers.xlsx>
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (5)
-
Edward Morris -
Greg Shatan -
Robin Gross -
Sabine.Meyer＠bmwi.bund.de -
Thomas Rickert