Re: Proposed Article 4 Changes --something we need to start paying some attention to beginning in the fall
"I have some indications that there are some components of the GNSO Community that are unhappy with at least some of the changes being proposed by ICANN. Very unhappy apparently." This is news to me. In fact my understanding is that it is precisely because of the community input that this approach is being undertaken. There was an original board position that no amendment was necessary. It was only when the GNSO, GAC and if i recall correctly ALAC pushed back that this change was accepted as necessary by the board. Cheers, CD Chris Disspain +44 7880 642456 Donuts and Afilias have rebranded to Identity Digital. identity.digital On 8 Aug 2024 at 15:25 +0100, Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC via Ccnso-council <ccnso-council@icann.org>, wrote:
Greetings, On another topic that we might want to start paying attention to, it seems the ICANN Board wants to fiddle around with Article 4 of the Bylaws (“Accountability and Review”). There seem to be two proposals, The first, “Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments Related to Grant Program (Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments Related to Grant Program (icann.org)), appears to be an attempt to exempt the forthcoming Grant program of the Review Mechanisms embedded in the Bylaws. The second, “IRP-IOT – Proposed updates to the IRP Supplementary Procedures” (IRP-IOT – Proposed updates to the IRP Supplementary Procedures (icann.org)), appears to be some housekeeping regarding Supplementary rules for the IRP process. As Article 4 (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 4.7) is a Fundamental Bylaw, the Board will have to seek Empowered Community approval (assuming they muster the necessary super majority in the Board vote(s).) As part of this process, Annex D (Section 1.3) of the Bylaws stipulates that an “An Approval Action Community Forum”, should the Empowered Administrations requests one. Historically, the few EC directed Community forums have been held at ICANN meetings, but they can be held virtually. Assuming that the Board does pass out these proposals for EC review and approval, it is likely that a Community Approval Forum will likely be on the Schedule for ICANN 81. I have some indications that there are some components of the GNSO Community that are unhappy with at least some of the changes being proposed by ICANN. Very unhappy apparently. Should the Board put these proposed changes out for EC review and approval and a Forum is scheduled at ICANN81, I suggest you bring popcorn, as I would expect some fireworks. More seriously though, over the next month or so we as the Council needs to start paying attention to this. The comment periods are open until 16 September; thus I do not expect things to heat up on this matter until early October. I just thought I would put this on the Council’s radar…
//Stephen
_______________________________________________ Ccnso-council mailing list -- ccnso-council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccnso-council-leave@icann.org _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
My understanding is that the IPC folks are not at all happy; I will re-check my source. They may have calmed down since the Spring as this is ICANN’s second bite at the Grant carveout language. //S From: Chris Disspain <chris.disspain@identity.digital> Date: Thursday, August 8, 2024 at 10:49 To: "Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC" <sdeerhake@nic.as>, "ccnso-council@icann.org" <ccnso-council@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ccnso-council] Proposed Article 4 Changes --something we need to start paying some attention to beginning in the fall "I have some indications that there are some components of the GNSO Community that are unhappy with at least some of the changes being proposed by ICANN. Very unhappy apparently." This is news to me. In fact my understanding is that it is precisely because of the community input that this approach is being undertaken. There was an original board position that no amendment was necessary. It was only when the GNSO, GAC and if i recall correctly ALAC pushed back that this change was accepted as necessary by the board. Cheers, CD Chris Disspain +44 7880 642456 [cid:D45C6BF723074FBB930BA9F56C13EC58] Donuts and Afilias have rebranded to Identity Digital. identity.digital<http://www.identity.digital> On 8 Aug 2024 at 15:25 +0100, Stephen Deerhake @ ASNIC via Ccnso-council <ccnso-council@icann.org>, wrote: Greetings, On another topic that we might want to start paying attention to, it seems the ICANN Board wants to fiddle around with Article 4 of the Bylaws (“Accountability and Review”). There seem to be two proposals, The first, “Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments Related to Grant Program (Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments Related to Grant Program (icann.org)<https://www.icann.org/es/public-comment/proceeding/proposed-fundamental-byla...>), appears to be an attempt to exempt the forthcoming Grant program of the Review Mechanisms embedded in the Bylaws. The second, “IRP-IOT – Proposed updates to the IRP Supplementary Procedures” (IRP-IOT – Proposed updates to the IRP Supplementary Procedures (icann.org)<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/irp-iot-proposed-updates-...>), appears to be some housekeeping regarding Supplementary rules for the IRP process. As Article 4 (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 4.7) is a Fundamental Bylaw, the Board will have to seek Empowered Community approval (assuming they muster the necessary super majority in the Board vote(s).) As part of this process, Annex D (Section 1.3) of the Bylaws stipulates that an “An Approval Action Community Forum”, should the Empowered Administrations requests one. Historically, the few EC directed Community forums have been held at ICANN meetings, but they can be held virtually. Assuming that the Board does pass out these proposals for EC review and approval, it is likely that a Community Approval Forum will likely be on the Schedule for ICANN 81. I have some indications that there are some components of the GNSO Community that are unhappy with at least some of the changes being proposed by ICANN. Very unhappy apparently. Should the Board put these proposed changes out for EC review and approval and a Forum is scheduled at ICANN81, I suggest you bring popcorn, as I would expect some fireworks. More seriously though, over the next month or so we as the Council needs to start paying attention to this. The comment periods are open until 16 September; thus I do not expect things to heat up on this matter until early October. I just thought I would put this on the Council’s radar… //Stephen _______________________________________________ Ccnso-council mailing list -- ccnso-council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to ccnso-council-leave@icann.org _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (2)
-
Chris Disspain -
Stephen Deerhake ＠ ASNIC