Re: [ccnso-council] Decision is needed: CCWG Auction Proceeds and our decision not to participate (March 2015)

Sept. 29, 2016

      Dear all,

Although I was initially not enthousiast of getting the ccNSO involved and hence revising our original decision, a couple of important arguments were brought to my attention.

There are a fair share of circumstances that affect us all as TLD operators (cc, g or new g). Cybersecurity and all the treaths that are linked with it has found a prominent place on the agenda of various players such as lawmakers and law enforment agencies. But there is still a lack of understanding among those concerning the role of the DNS and our function/position as registries. It would surely help our whole sector if more effort could be done in further educating those parties about our industry and the various roles we have in it. 

While GNSO might be primarely focussing on ways how to improve business in terms of sales and revenu, the above might rathere be echoed by our community.

Hence, I see a greater need to become actively involved and be part of the decision making process.

Best

Peter 

Peter Vergote
Legal & Corp. Affairs Manager
+32 16 29 89 28
+32 474 790096
www.dnsbelgium.be <http://www.dnsbelgium.be/>

Op 29/09/16 14:03 heeft owner-ccnso-council@icann.org namens HiroHOTTA <owner-ccnso-council@icann.org namens hotta@jprs.co.jp> geschreven:

    I am in favor of "participation from ccTLD community".
    Hiro

    On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:28:03 +0300
    Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
    > 
    > Dear Councillors,
    > 
    > Let me remind you that your decision is needed regarding the CCWG Auction
    > Proceeds - should we revise our decision from March 2015 or not. So far
    > there are three Councillors in favour and three against. If you wish to vote
    > in favour, please do respond to this email by 30 September 12.00 UTC.
    > 
    > I do not wish to influence your decision but I think I should note a couple
    > of things that were brought to my attention:
    > 1. there are ccTLDs that are willing and ready to participate in this CCWG
    > and would welcome if the ccNSO was a chartering organisation
    > 2. ccTLDs will be able to share their experience and contribute to the work
    > of the CCWG even if the ccNSO does not become a chartering organisation
    > 3. Some ccTLDs operate also new gTLDs and thus the impartiality of the ccNSO
    > may be questioned if the ccNSO becomes a chartering organisation.
    > Thank you!
    > 
    > Kind regards,
    > 
    > ]{atrina
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > From:  <owner-ccnso-council@icann.org> on behalf of Katrina Sataki
    > <katrina@nic.lv>
    > Date:  Sunday 25 September 2016 22:33
    > To:  ccNSO Council <ccnso-council@icann.org>
    > Subject:  [ccnso-council] Decision is needed: CCWG Auction Proceeds and our
    > decision not to participate (March 2015)
    > 
    > 
    > Dear Colleagues,
    > 
    > Your decision is needed!
    > 
    > There is a unanimous decision of the ccNSO Council from March 2015 not to
    > participate in the CCWG Auction Proceeds (we have informed other communities
    > about this decision). In response to  the request we received from the
    > co-chairs of the CCWG Auction Proceeds, Becky and Chris expressed support
    > and arguments in favour of active participation. To reverse the Council
    > decision we would need at least majority of Councillors voting in favour of
    > that.
    > 
    > Currently (if I interpret your votes correctly) we have:
    > 
    > Becky - in favour (of reversing the decision)
    > 
    > Katrina - against 
    > Demi - against
    > Souleymane - against
    > 
    > May I ask other Councillors to voice their opinions? If you believe that
    > circumstances have changed  and in order for ccTLDs to contribute and share
    > their experience meaningfully there is a need for the ccNSO to join as a
    > chartering organisation, please vote in favour of reversing the Council
    > decision. If you think that ccTLDs can contribute without the ccNSO being a
    > chartering organisation, vote against. No vote will be counted as a vote
    > against reversing the decision.
    > 
    > Thank you very much!
    > 
    > Kind regards,
    > 
    > ]{atrina
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > From:  "Burr, Becky" <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>
    > Date:  Sunday 25 September 2016 20:03
    > To:  Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk>, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>
    > Cc:  ccNSO Council <ccnso-council@icann.org>
    > Subject:  Re: [ccnso-council] CCWG Auction Proceeds and our decision not to
    > participate (March 2015)
    > 
    > +1
    > 
    > 
    > J. Beckwith Burr
    > Neustar, Inc./Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
    > 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
    > Office:+1.202.533.2932 Mobile:+1.202.352.6367 /neustar.biz
    > <http://www.neustar.biz>
    > 
    > From: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk>
    > Date: Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 10:28 AM
    > To: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>
    > Cc: Becky Burr <becky.burr@neustar.biz>, "'ccnso-council@icann. org'"
    > <ccnso-council@icann.org>
    > Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] CCWG Auction Proceeds and our decision not to
    > participate (March 2015)
    > 
    > Hi Katrina, 
    > 
    > In an ideal word I think it would be good for the ccTLDs to be a chartering
    > organisation so that we can be involved in the development of and ?sign off1
    > on something that is likely to be a significant development in ICANN. I
    > think being a part ?owner1 of the mechanism or entity that results from the
    > this ccwg would be of benefit to ccTLDs in the future.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Cheers,
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Chris
    > 
    > > On 22 Sep 2016, at 18:33, Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv> wrote:
    > > 
    > > 
    > > As far as I know, some ccTLDs have already shared their experience and I am
    > > sure will gladly do so in the future.
    > > 
    > > Becky, Chris, I am not sure I understood your remarks - do you think there is
    > > a need to reconsider the Council decision and participate in the WG as a
    > > chartering organisation? Or, according to initial plan, informing and
    > > encouraging individual ccTLDs to share their experience would suffice?
    > > 
    > > Thanks!
    > > 
    > > Regards,
    > > 
    > > ]{atrina
    > > 
    > > 
    > > 
    > > From: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk>
    > > Date: Thursday 22 September 2016 19:39
    > > To: Becky Burr <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>
    > > Cc: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>, ccNSO Council <ccnso-council@icann.org>
    > > Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] CCWG Auction Proceeds and our decision not to
    > > participate (March 2015)
    > > 
    > > I agree with Becky. I understand that there could be workload issues for
    > > ccTLDs that would mitigate against participating but I do think it is
    > > important to remember that an ICANN wide Foundation or or Fund is a
    > > possible/likely outcome and ccTLD input into the scope of such an entity would
    > > be extremely valuable.
    > > 
    > > Happy to go into more detail of that1s helpful.
    > > 
    > > 
    > > Cheers,
    > > 
    > > Chris
    > > 
    > >> On 22 Sep 2016, at 16:52, Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz> wrote:
    > >> 
    > >> I think that ccTLDs have a lot to offer in this process.  There is no
    > >> understanding or expectation that the contributors (gTLD applicants) will
    > >> control or benefit from the auction proceeds.  The CCWG will need to develop
    > >> the objectives for use of the proceeds.  I could easily imagine that capacity
    > >> building for struggling ccTLDs might fit into those objectives.  I think the
    > >> cc1s have a lot to add to this process.
    > >> 
    > >> 
    > >> 
    > >> J. Beckwith Burr
    > >> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
    > >> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
    > >> Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz
    > >> <http://www.neustar.biz/>
    > >> 
    > >> From: Katrina Sataki <katrina@nic.lv>
    > >> Date: Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 11:35 AM
    > >> To: "'ccnso-council@icann. org'" <ccnso-council@icann.org>
    > >> Subject: [ccnso-council] CCWG Auction Proceeds and our decision not to
    > >> participate (March 2015)
    > >> 
    > >> Dear All,
    > >>  
    > >> We have been approached by the co-chairs of the Drafting Team for the charter
    > >> of the Auction proceeds cross-community working group.
    > >>  
    > >> The ccNSO Council is asked the following questions:
    > >> - Whether it has any pertinent issues with the proposed charter (attached)
    > >> - Whether it intends to adopt the charter and hence become one of the
    > >> chartering organizations.
    > >>  
    > >> In March 2015 we decided NOT to participate in the cross-community working
    > >> group. The main reason is that ccTLDs did not contribute to the proceeds of
    > >> the auction, and hence participation is considered out of scope (see attached
    > >> letter dated 21 May 2015). At the same time the ccNSO Council did acknowledge
    > >> that some ccTLDs have extensive experience in dealing with funds such as the
    > >> auction proceeds and this experience could be beneficial to the process. We
    > >> agreed that, once the charter was adopted, we would convey an invitation to
    > >> individual ccTLDs and those related to ccTLDs with an interest and experience
    > >> in this area.
    > >>  
    > >> In my view the reasons not to participate as a chartering organization still
    > >> stand, and therefore there is no need to reconsider the decision we made in
    > >> 2015. Any other thoughts?
    > >>  
    > >> If you do not object, I suggest that we stick to our original decision and
    > >> inform the co-chairs accordingly.
    > >>  
    > >> Please let me know if you believe that we should choose an alternative course
    > >> of action by Monday.
    > >>  
    > >> Thank you!
    > >>  
    > >> Kind regards,
    > >>  
    > >> ]{atrina
    > > 
    > 
    > 
    >