Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Party2] Independent Review
Dear David Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties. Best regards Alice
Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David
At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote:
Dear David,
Thank you for this list of topics.
11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track
Best regards Alice Munyua AUC
On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote:
[This is for the _Independent Review subgroup_: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here]
I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP --
I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others:
1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that?
As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post> book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org <mailto:WP2@icann.org>
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2>
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post>book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
Thanks to Alice, David, Kieren and others for flagging these specific IRP issues. I'd like to raise another one, which may be related to the communication issue Alice has raised in the email below, but I'm curious to know whether some degree of transparency can/should be introduced to the process. Not being a lawyer, it's not clear to me how far confidentiality considerations apply in IRPs, so I'm happy to be corrected if transparency would somehow transgress confidentiality. But it would seem important to find some means of keeping the community at large, as well as directly affected or interested parties, better informed as to the status of a pending IRP. Cheers, Suz Suzanne Murray Radell Senior Policy Advisor NTIA/Office of International Affairs PH: 202-482-3167 FX: 202-482-1865 ________________________________ From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Alice Munyua [alice@dotafrica.org] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 12:18 PM To: David Post; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Party2] Independent Review Dear David Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties. Best regards Alice Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote: Dear David, Thank you for this list of topics. 11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track Best regards Alice Munyua AUC On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote: [This is for the Independent Review subgroup: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here] I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP -- I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others: 1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that? As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David ******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <https://as.ntia.doc.gov/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx> ******************************* _______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org<mailto:WP2@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 _______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org<mailto:WP2@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 ******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <https://as.ntia.doc.gov/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx> *******************************
Hello Suzanne,
But it would seem important to find some means of keeping the community at large, as well as directly affected or interested parties, better informed as to the status of a pending IRP.
ICANN publishes documents associated with current Independent Review Proceedings at: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/accountability/irp-en Regards, Bruce Tonkin
Still going through the lawsuits. I wanted to share this one PDF with you https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann-supplemental-brief-02jun14... Sincerely Carrie Devorah www.centerforcopyrightintegrity.com On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Bruce Tonkin < Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
Hello Suzanne,
But it would seem important to find some means of keeping the community at large, as well as directly affected or interested parties, better informed as to the status of a pending IRP.
ICANN publishes documents associated with current Independent Review Proceedings at:
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/accountability/irp-en
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Sincerely CARRIE Devorah 562 688 2883 DISCLAIMER : With the continuing crossing and interfacing of platforms both on & off line both with & without our knowledge nor approval to note nothing sent over the Internet anymore is ever private nor should be presumed to be so. If it is that much of a secret, say nothing. If you must? Take a lesson from our military- hand write the note, chew then swallow
Dear Bruce Thank you. We appreciate that IRP proceedings are published. What we have found lacking is timely regular communication from ICANN staff and availability of a predictable schedule, which brings us back to the issue of clear timelines for each stage. Best regards Alice
Hello Suzanne,
But it would seem important to find some means of keeping the community at large, as well as directly affected or interested parties, better informed as to the status of a pending IRP.
ICANN publishes documents associated with current Independent Review Proceedings at:
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/accountability/irp-en
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hello Alice, We appreciate that IRP proceedings are published.
What we have found lacking is timely regular communication from ICANN staff and availability of a predictable schedule, which brings us back to the issue of clear timelines for each stage.
Yes - that is a good point. I will see what we can do in that area. The IRP is run independently of ICANN - but we can at least be asking the question, and posting the answers we receive. As you have already pointed out we need to be able to hold the providers of such dispute services accountable as well. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
Bruce, The case addresses and touches some among many short coming in the ICANN accountability such as the status of the IRP ( binding, Non binding, Comparative study or what ? These are the imoportant issues to be really examined analized and acted uopon. Regards Kavouss 2015-03-08 7:55 GMT+01:00 Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>:
Hello Alice,
We appreciate that IRP proceedings are published.
What we have found lacking is timely regular communication from ICANN staff and availability of a predictable schedule, which brings us back to the issue of clear timelines for each stage.
Yes - that is a good point. I will see what we can do in that area. The IRP is run independently of ICANN - but we can at least be asking the question, and posting the answers we receive.
As you have already pointed out we need to be able to hold the providers of such dispute services accountable as well.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
We need to add an evaluation of the "Cooperative Engagement Process" or "CEP" - the initial or pre step to trigger an IRP on an ICANN decision. There are timing, transparency, and due process issues to consider in the CEP step an ICANN IRP. Thanks, Robin On Mar 6, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Alice Munyua wrote:
Dear David
Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties.
Best regards Alice
Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David
At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote:
Dear David,
Thank you for this list of topics.
11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track
Best regards Alice Munyua AUC
On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote:
[This is for the Independent Review subgroup: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here]
I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP --
I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others:
1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that?
As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com *******************************
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com *******************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Bruce, the IRP PDF is improved. We still have a long way to go. To throw this into stark relief, here's an analogy: Imagine you got a mortgage to build a house. Right before you start to build, a third party puts some 'hold' on your land with city council. Your building permit freezes. You have literally no way of knowing anything about how long the process will be, if it is even justified or has standing, and all questions you ask to the Council are met with, well check this PDF we update it every so often, there's some cryptic stuff in there but even if you aren't on it you might still be on hold. There's some timelines but no one pays attention to them. Might be six months, might be four years. Might be until the sun expands to fry the earth. Now go tell your wife. Best. J. On 8 March 2015 at 12:03, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
We need to add an evaluation of the "Cooperative Engagement Process" or "CEP" - the initial or pre step to trigger an IRP on an ICANN decision. There are timing, transparency, and due process issues to consider in the CEP step an ICANN IRP.
Thanks, Robin
On Mar 6, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Alice Munyua wrote:
Dear David
Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties.
Best regards Alice
Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David
At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote:
Dear David,
Thank you for this list of topics.
11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track
Best regards Alice Munyua AUC
On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote:
[This is for the *Independent Review subgroup*: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here]
I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP --
I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others:
1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that?
As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing listWP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
_______________________________________________ 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
+1 Robin, Suzanne & James. A couple of points on a more substantive note: The main delay in current IRPs is the CEP and appointment of panelists. This is taking 6-12 months, the desired length of the whole process according to ICANN Bylaws. Other areas of timeline concern are the emergency relief process, the hearing process, the deliberation process, and the 'clarification' process, as explained below, taken from the ICDR rules: Days Action Start Claimant request (Emergency relief may also be requested) 30 Respondent (ICANN) response X Panel constituted (taking 6-12 months) 30 Claimant reply 30 Respondent (ICANN) sur-reply X Hearing 60 Deliberation 60 Clarification X ICANN Board consideration X Board Reconsideration X CEP/IRP redux (?)
From what I can tell there does not seem to be actual agreement between ICDR and ICANN about the supplementary procedures and how and when they apply. See: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/procedural-order-2-10nov14-en.pd... -- this is an indication that the group needs to be sure that what it comes up with doesn't look good on paper and then fall down in implementation.
Also, as identified in the table, the final element of an IRP is a Board action, which may or may not be up for reconsideration and IRP all over again for other reasons, effectively putting any ICANN Board decision at risk of an infinite delay. Of note, there is a provision for an expedited IRP in the ICDR rules that takes only 60 days. There is a cap on the damages threshold but parties can jointly agree to waive the cap. No one has yet availed themselves of this. I found this a helpful read in this regard: The case against arbitration: do the doubters have a point? - http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=76145cb6-bb5b-4937-b6d9-8d57c8... Best, J. Jacob Malthouse Co-founder & Director, Big Room Inc. 778-960-6527 http://www.bigroom.ca/ On 9 March 2015 at 12:08, Jacob Malthouse <jacob@bigroom.ca> wrote:
Bruce, the IRP PDF is improved. We still have a long way to go.
To throw this into stark relief, here's an analogy:
Imagine you got a mortgage to build a house. Right before you start to build, a third party puts some 'hold' on your land with city council. Your building permit freezes.
You have literally no way of knowing anything about how long the process will be, if it is even justified or has standing, and all questions you ask to the Council are met with, well check this PDF we update it every so often, there's some cryptic stuff in there but even if you aren't on it you might still be on hold. There's some timelines but no one pays attention to them. Might be six months, might be four years. Might be until the sun expands to fry the earth.
Now go tell your wife.
Best. J.
On 8 March 2015 at 12:03, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
We need to add an evaluation of the "Cooperative Engagement Process" or "CEP" - the initial or pre step to trigger an IRP on an ICANN decision. There are timing, transparency, and due process issues to consider in the CEP step an ICANN IRP.
Thanks, Robin
On Mar 6, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Alice Munyua wrote:
Dear David
Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties.
Best regards Alice
Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David
At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote:
Dear David,
Thank you for this list of topics.
11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track
Best regards Alice Munyua AUC
On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote:
[This is for the *Independent Review subgroup*: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here]
I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP --
I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others:
1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that?
As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing listWP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
_______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2
******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> *******************************
_______________________________________________ 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
Hello Jacob, Yes – agreed we need to tighten both reporting against timelines, and also ensure that the providers meet the agreed timelines. I have asked for this to be on the agenda of the next Board Governance Committee meeting. Regards, Bruce Tonkin From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacob Malthouse Sent: Tuesday, 10 March 2015 6:09 AM To: Robin Gross Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Accountability Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Party2] Independent Review Bruce, the IRP PDF is improved. We still have a long way to go. To throw this into stark relief, here's an analogy: Imagine you got a mortgage to build a house. Right before you start to build, a third party puts some 'hold' on your land with city council. Your building permit freezes. You have literally no way of knowing anything about how long the process will be, if it is even justified or has standing, and all questions you ask to the Council are met with, well check this PDF we update it every so often, there's some cryptic stuff in there but even if you aren't on it you might still be on hold. There's some timelines but no one pays attention to them. Might be six months, might be four years. Might be until the sun expands to fry the earth. Now go tell your wife. Best. J. On 8 March 2015 at 12:03, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote: We need to add an evaluation of the "Cooperative Engagement Process" or "CEP" - the initial or pre step to trigger an IRP on an ICANN decision. There are timing, transparency, and due process issues to consider in the CEP step an ICANN IRP. Thanks, Robin On Mar 6, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Alice Munyua wrote: Dear David Thank you. Re-sending and would like to add another issue regarding timely communication to all affected parties. Best regards Alice Alice Thanks - it doesn't look like your message got distributed to the group list which I think would be a good idea - David At 01:48 AM 3/6/2015, you wrote: Dear David, Thank you for this list of topics. 11. Should the IRP be provided with clear time lines for each stage 12 What provisions can be put in place for redress against the IRP provider in the event the process goes off track Best regards Alice Munyua AUC On 06/03/2015 01:19, David Post wrote: [This is for the Independent Review subgroup: Paul Rosenzweig, David McAuley, Jonathan Zuck, Robin Gross, Chris LaHatte, me]. I don't think a separate mailing list has been set up, so I apologize to the rest of you who are working on other issues here] I'm a little bit late to the WP2 party, but I thought, just for the purpose of kicking off our discussion, we might see if there we can generate a list of topics that we need to cover for the design of the IRP -- I'm sure there are others, but here's a starter group, picking up on some of the "issues" listed in the latest work item list and adding a few others: 1. Will the IRP be a permanent standing panel, or will it have rotating membership? 2. What is the scope of the IRB's jurisdiction - what kinds of claims can it hear? 3. What standard of review will it use to render its decisions? 4. Standing - who can bring claims to the IRP? 5. How will IRB members be nominated and appointed? 6. Term - for how long will IRP members serve? Can they be re-appointed? 7. Will there be a process for removal of IRP members? 8. Costs - who will pay IRP costs? 9. How will IRP decisions be implemented? Are they binding on the Board? Can they be overturned by the Board? 10. Should changes to the IRP process be made permanent (i.e., not subject to Board modification)? If so, how can we accomplish that? As I said, I'm sure there are things missing or mis-stated - but I do think it would be worth trying to put a list like this together to structure our discussion as we plunge forward. David ******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> ******************************* _______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org<mailto:WP2@icann.org> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 _______________________________________________ WP2 mailing list WP2@icann.org<mailto:WP2@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2 ******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n <http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0> music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic <http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0> publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com <http://www.davidpost.com%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0/> ******************************* _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
participants (7)
-
Alice Munyua -
Bruce Tonkin -
Carrie Devorah -
Jacob Malthouse -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Robin Gross -
Suzanne Radell