I would strongly advocate against the use of the term 'minority position'. Sincerely, Zahid Jamil Barrister-at-law Jamil & Jamil Barristers-at-law 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan Cell: +923008238230 Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 Fax: +92 21 5655026 www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited. Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -----Original Message----- From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Sender: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:28:37 To: 'bc - GNSO list'<bc-gnso@icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] Results of BC poll on DAGv4 comments From: Steve DelBianco, vice chair for policy coordination To: BC Members ( Background on this policy poll appears at the end of this email ) On 26-July, GNSO Secretariat (Glen de Saint Géry) downloaded and counted ballots for the two BC position statements on DAGv4. Glen reported there were 24 (twenty four) votes (incl 1 abstention) in the bcvote@bizconst.org mailbox. Glen opened, logged, and counted each vote. The results: a) With respect to the "Points 1-3" there were 18 votes of "Support" and 4 votes of "Do not Support". (One person did not vote in this category) b) With respect to the "Rights Protection Mechanism" there were 18 votes of "Support" and 5 votes of "Do not Support". ***end of Glen’s report*** 24 ballots represents 47% of 51 eligible members. While the BC poll shows significant majority support (82% on points 1-3 and 78% on RPMs), we did not reach the quorum required by our Charter, Section 7.4: A position paper which has the support of at least a simple majority of 51% of the eligible votes in favour will be deemed adopted by the Constituency so long as the total number of members voting represents not less than a quorum of 50% of paid-up members. Where a quorum is not reached the Executive Committee will decide whether a re-vote, re-thinking of the position or publication of a minority position is required and the process will then repeat as appropriate. http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm Before the results were in, the Executive Committee approved a process in the event quorum was not achieved: Since quorum was not achieved, the Executive Committee will submit the 2 position statements to ICANN as minority positions, per Section 7.4 of the BC Charter. That is, these positions were approved by a clear majority of those voting, but the number of voters was 2 short of the required quorum of 26 (50% of 51eligible voters). On the attached position for "Points 1-3", 18 BC members voted to support, 4 members voted "Do not Support,” and there was 1 abstention. [attach position] On the attached position for "Rights Protection Mechanisms", 18 BC members voted to support, while 5 members voted "Do not Support.” [attach position] Using the description above, we will post these 2 position documents to ICANN’s public comment forum today. Each comment includes a note explaining the voting and failure to reach quorum. Last week, we alerted staff that the BC would be a few days late with our comments. *** background emails below *** From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 18:38:24 -0400 To: 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso@icann.org> Subject: Documents and ballot for BC Comments on DAGv4 (poll closes noon EDT Friday 23-Jul-2010) As described in our previous note (repeated below), the BC is now polling members to determine support for proposed comments on Draft Applicant Guidebook version 4 (DAGv4). Attached are three documents: *** Comment part 1: DAGv4 BC points 1-3.pdf Points 1thru 3: This proposed comment is a restatement of prior BC comments regarding: market differentiation; translations and IDN versions of gTLDs; and community-based evaluation scoring. Our Rapporteur Ron Andruff updated these prior comments to reflect some recommendations of the latest economic analysis provided to ICANN. *** Comment part 2: DAGv4 BC points on RPMs.pdf Rights Protection Mechanisms. Sarah Deutsch and Jon Nevett collaborated on this proposed comment, which is based upon the BC “minority statement” we approved and submitted on a previous draft of the DAG. *** A blank ballot form: BC Polling Form 20-Jul-2010.doc, where you can indicate support or non-support for each of these 2 proposed comments. Voting instructions for BC members: Attached is your ballot form. Please complete your ballot and save the document to your local computer. Then attach your saved ballot to an email and send to bcvote@bizconst.org Please use the subject line "DAG4 Comments Vote". You will receive an auto confirmation of your email. This mailbox will retain all the ballot emails. Nobody on the Executive Committee has access to this mailbox at this time. When the voting closes at 12:00 noon EDT on Friday 23-July-2010, we will arrange for our Secretariat (or another neutral party) to access and tally the ballots. Reminder: please submit your ballot by 12:00 noon EDT on Friday 23-July-2010. Thanks to all who contributed to these draft comments. ------ Forwarded Message From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:14:38 -0400 To: 'bc - GNSO list' <bc-gnso@icann.org> Cc: "excomm@bizconst.org" <excomm@bizconst.org> Subject: Process and polling for BC Comments on DAGv4 From: Marilyn Cade (BC Chair) and Steve DelBianco (vice chair for policy coordination) to: BC members Comments on DAGv4 are due to ICANN on 21-July. Ron Andruff volunteered to be BC Rapporteur and worked with Sarah Deutsch to circulate a draft on 14-July. For the last week, about a dozen BC members debated and exchanged alternate drafts via email. During that discussion, at least 5 BC members expressed opposition to the comment draft. If opposition reaches 15% of paid membership, section 7.4 in our Charter is triggered: 7.4. Approval where there is continued disagreement Where the discussion mechanism indicates a split in the Constituency of more than 15% of the number of members, there will then be a vote (typically by e-mail) on the position. Only the designated representatives of members will be eligible to vote. A position paper which has the support of at least a simple majority of 51% of the eligible votes in favour will be deemed adopted by the Constituency so long as the total number of members voting represents not less than a quorum of 50% of paid-up members. Where a quorum is not reached the Executive Committee will decide whether a re-vote, re-thinking of the position or publication of a minority position is required and the process will then repeat as appropriate. http://www.bizconst.org/charter.htm The ability of the BC to comment on DAG 4 is important to many of the members. The time line has to be modified to do follow the polling process in our charter. The majority of your executive committee supports giving a clean document to members to vote/poll in a shortened time frame. We respect that some of you may not be in agreement with the decision. However, we see no other way to achieve a submission within a reasonable time frame. Although it will be 2 days late, it will be within a reasonable time frame to be considered by ICANN. Ron Andruff is working with a few others on a clean document that he will distribute by 4pm EDT today. The goal is to for this document to get as close as we can to a consensus that all BC members can vote on. Ron may also distribute additional section(s) that would be subject to a separate vote. We will then conduct a formal members poll to close by noon EDT, Friday 23-July. We understand that this is not the best option. But given time pressures, and the work that has gone into this from all members, we want to ensure that we do all we can to have as much agreement on a core submission as we can, and that we find ways to hear the voices and concerns of all members. ------ End of Forwarded Message