Dear all, Recently ICANN legal provided a response to the ccNSO statement on the proposed changes to Article 10 of the ICANN Bylaws ( https://ccnso.icann.org/en/about/ccnso-to-icann-legal-18feb21-en.pdf) . ICANN legal had some questions and suggested some additional changes. On Friday 30 July there was a meeting between Alejandra, supported by staff and ICANN Legal to discuss their questions and suggestions. This discussion resulted in an updated version of the amendments to the Bylaws (attached). Last week the drafting team (Ai-chin, Jiankang and Hiro) looked at the proposals. They agreed with all the proposed changes. In addition they again noted that the issue pertaining to a single entity organization managing multiple ccTLD related to different Territories and their ability to cast multiple votes. This was already raised as an issue when they drafted the ccNSO position, but it is brought to the attention of the Council again. In addition the drafting teams suggests to change the heading of Article 10. 4.e. The suggestion is to strike “and Territory” from the heading: “ Designation of Representative and Territory “. The section is about the designation of the ccTLD Representative. As a next step you are asked if you any concerns/comments regarding the latest iteration. Please mail them to the list by Thursday 19 August 2021. If there are no major concerns from your end, the community will be consulted starting 20 August. Goal is to have the ccNSO response on latest iteration ready by the end of August 2021. Kind regards, Bart The additional proposed amendments to the Bylaws concerning the ccNSO are: Article 10 * Section 10.4 (a) – changed “variant” to “modification” since variant has a special meaning in this context. Let me know if this works. * Section 10.4(i) – added the concept of plurality. Now, the rule would be that the a majority of the Emissaries entitled to vote in a Geographic Region is needed for quorum, and a candidate must receive a plurality of votes cast by the Emissaries within the Geographic Region to win. Annex B * Section 1.a. – Changed “affirmative vote of” to “documentation of support from” so as not to confuse the issue about voting on requesting an Issue Report. * Section 1.e. – Changed the language regarding requesting an Issue Report by the members of the ccNSO. The language now reads, “At least ten members of the ccNSO from at least ten different Territories may call for the creation of an Issue Report at any meeting or by electronic means.” * Section 1, last paragraph – Deleted the following phrase from the last paragraph of Section 1 so as to not confuse the issue about voting on requesting an Issue Report: “Any request for an Issue Report must be in writing and must set out the issue upon which an Issue Report is requested in sufficient detail to enable the Issue Report to be prepared. It shall be open to the Council to request further information or undertake further research or investigation for the purpose of determining whether or not the requested Issue Report should be created.” This final sentence creates ambiguity. * Section 2, 1st paragraph – changed the time from 7 days to 14 days for when the Council is required to appoint an Issue Manager after receipt of a request for an Issue Report. Also, deleted the references to the Item 1 sub-points since the timing requirement will apply to all of Item 1. * Section 3.a – changed “e-mail” to “electronic means” * Section 4 – changed “e-mail” to “electronic means” * Section 7.b. – changed “e-mail” to “electronic means”