Fwd: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
Please see the following reply I sent to the GNSO list. There was not sufficient time to get it reviewed prior to sending, but if I have incorrectly represented the ALAC, please let me know and I will post a correction. The note was in reply to a proposal from Mary Wong with comments from Tim Ruiz and Jeff Neuman. Alan
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:53:43 -0400 To: GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
I will try to address Jeff's questions, but will in parallel pass my answers by the ALAC to ensure that I am not putting words into their collective mouths.
First, I read Mary's "the chartering process" to mean "the process laid out in their charter(s)".
On why At-Large staff forwarded the report to the Board, this was done at the request of the ALAC through its Chair and Executive Committee and was not an independent action of staff..
Regarding the appropriateness of one of the chartering organizations sending the report to the Board, the GNSO charter had the following sentence which the ALAC copied verbatim: "4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by the respective SO/AC." There is nothing there that I construe to meaning that the chartering organizations must work in tandem.
Alan
At 17/05/2011 09:02 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
I also would like to see the statement about the "scrupulous observance of the chartering process" removed. We still need to find out why the at-large icann staff sent the report to the board on May 9th as is indicated in Olivier's note. I am also not convinced that one organization sending the report to the board without the approval of the other organization is in line with the chartering process, but we can discuss that further. Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. Vice President, Law & Policy NeuStar, Inc. Jeff.Neuman@neustar.biz
From: tim@godaddy.com [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 08:12 AM To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>; owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org>; Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
No objection if you remove the last sentence. There is no chartering process for CWGs. The ALAC and GNSO could not even agree on what the charter should be. And at least a few of us have concerns about how and why CWGs are being formed.Tim
From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com> Sender: owner-council@gnso.icann.org Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200 To: Council GNSO<council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report Councillors,
Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a message which I could send to the Chairman of the Board in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO.
Thanks Mary for providing this draft.
Please let me have your comments.
Stéphane
Le 14 mai 2011 à 16:31, <<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> <<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> a écrit :
Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to you on the Council letter; there has been some lively discussion among some NCSG folks about it.
We suggest the following draft:
Dear Peter,
We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and recommendations as soon as possible. The GNSO Council would also like to inform the Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's scrupulous observance of the chartering process, in submitting its Report simultaneously to ALAC and the GNSO for review.
I would be grateful if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to the Board.
Best regards, Stephane van Gelder Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: <mailto:mary.wong@law.unh.edu>mary.wong@law.unh.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: <http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: <http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>
Alan, I support your comments 100%. One might prefer that the GNSO comments to the Board would contain but a lick of reference to the actual issue of what JAS was forced to address, but this is their choice. - Evan On 17 May 2011 10:58, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Please see the following reply I sent to the GNSO list. There was not sufficient time to get it reviewed prior to sending, but if I have incorrectly represented the ALAC, please let me know and I will post a correction.
The note was in reply to a proposal from Mary Wong with comments from Tim Ruiz and Jeff Neuman.
Alan
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:53:43 -0400 To: GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
I will try to address Jeff's questions, but will in parallel pass my answers by the ALAC to ensure that I am not putting words into their collective mouths.
First, I read Mary's "the chartering process" to mean "the process laid out in their charter(s)".
On why At-Large staff forwarded the report to the Board, this was done at the request of the ALAC through its Chair and Executive Committee and was not an independent action of staff..
Regarding the appropriateness of one of the chartering organizations sending the report to the Board, the GNSO charter had the following sentence which the ALAC copied verbatim: "4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by the respective SO/AC." There is nothing there that I construe to meaning that the chartering organizations must work in tandem.
Alan
At 17/05/2011 09:02 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
I also would like to see the statement about the "scrupulous observance of the chartering process" removed. We still need to find out why the at-large icann staff sent the report to the board on May 9th as is indicated in Olivier's note. I am also not convinced that one organization sending the report to the board without the approval of the other organization is in line with the chartering process, but we can discuss that further. Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. Vice President, Law & Policy NeuStar, Inc. Jeff.Neuman@neustar.biz
From: tim@godaddy.com [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 08:12 AM To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>; owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org>; Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
No objection if you remove the last sentence. There is no chartering process for CWGs. The ALAC and GNSO could not even agree on what the charter should be. And at least a few of us have concerns about how and why CWGs are being formed.Tim
From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com> Sender: owner-council@gnso.icann.org Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200 To: Council GNSO<council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report Councillors,
Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a message which I could send to the Chairman of the Board in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO.
Thanks Mary for providing this draft.
Please let me have your comments.
Stéphane
Le 14 mai 2011 à 16:31, <<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> <<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> a écrit :
Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to you on the Council letter; there has been some lively discussion among some NCSG folks about it.
We suggest the following draft:
Dear Peter,
We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and recommendations as soon as possible. The GNSO Council would also like to inform the Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's scrupulous observance of the chartering process, in submitting its Report simultaneously to ALAC and the GNSO for review.
I would be grateful if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to the Board.
Best regards, Stephane van Gelder Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: <mailto:mary.wong@law.unh.edu>mary.wong@law.unh.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: <http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: <http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
Thank you Alan for your reply to the GNSO council. You did well. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations Phone : + 216 70 825 231 Mobile : + 216 98 330 114 Fax : + 216 70 825 231 ------------------------------------------------------------------ -----Message d'origine----- De : alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : mardi 17 mai 2011 15:58 À : ALAC Working List Objet : [ALAC] Fwd: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report Please see the following reply I sent to the GNSO list. There was not sufficient time to get it reviewed prior to sending, but if I have incorrectly represented the ALAC, please let me know and I will post a correction. The note was in reply to a proposal from Mary Wong with comments from Tim Ruiz and Jeff Neuman. Alan
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:53:43 -0400
To: GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org>
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC
on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
I will try to address Jeff's questions, but will
in parallel pass my answers by the ALAC to
ensure that I am not putting words into their collective mouths.
First, I read Mary's "the chartering process" to
mean "the process laid out in their charter(s)".
On why At-Large staff forwarded the report to
the Board, this was done at the request of the
ALAC through its Chair and Executive Committee
and was not an independent action of staff..
Regarding the appropriateness of one of the
chartering organizations sending the report to
the Board, the GNSO charter had the following
sentence which the ALAC copied verbatim: "4. All
communication to the ICANN Board regarding the
work of this Working Group shall be through the
respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by
the respective SO/AC." There is nothing there
that I construe to meaning that the chartering
organizations must work in tandem.
Alan
At 17/05/2011 09:02 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
I also would like to see the statement about
the "scrupulous observance of the chartering
process" removed. We still need to find out why
the at-large icann staff sent the report to the
board on May 9th as is indicated in Olivier's
note. I am also not convinced that one
organization sending the report to the board
without the approval of the other organization
is in line with the chartering process, but we can discuss that further.
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Vice President, Law & Policy
NeuStar, Inc.
Jeff.Neuman@neustar.biz
From: tim@godaddy.com [mailto:tim@godaddy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 08:12 AM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder
<stephane.vangelder@indom.com>;
owner-council@gnso.icann.org
<owner-council@gnso.icann.org>; Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
No objection if you remove the last sentence.
There is no chartering process for CWGs. The
ALAC and GNSO could not even agree on what the
charter should be. And at least a few of us
have concerns about how and why CWGs are being formed.Tim
From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>
Sender: owner-council@gnso.icann.org
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200
To: Council GNSO<council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the
ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
Councillors,
Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a
message which I could send to the Chairman of
the Board in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO.
Thanks Mary for providing this draft.
Please let me have your comments.
Stéphane
Le 14 mai 2011 Ã 16:31,
<<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>
<<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> a écrit :
Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to
you on the Council letter; there has been some
lively discussion among some NCSG folks about it.
We suggest the following draft:
Dear Peter,
We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the
Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant
Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second
Milestone Report. As the other chartering
organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council
notes that it has not yet approved the Report.
We acknowledge the Board's desire to move
forward with new gTLDs, including issues
relating to applicant support, and hope to
provide the Board with our advice and recommendations as soon as possible.
The GNSO Council would also like to inform the
Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's
scrupulous observance of the chartering
process, in submitting its Report
simultaneously to ALAC and the GNSO for review.
I would be grateful if you could convey the
GNSO Council's message to the Board.
Best regards,
Stephane van Gelder
Cheers
Mary
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two
White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email:
<mailto:mary.wong@law.unh.edu>mary.wong@law.unh.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
<http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.law.unh.edu/marywon g/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social
Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
<http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA C)
participants (3)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Evan Leibovitch -
Tijani BEN JEMAA