Bill, I understand your comments, but in general it sounds like you would support Philip's approach, correct? We will discuss with the rest of the RrC Executive Committee. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] RAA Drafting Team From: William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch> Date: Fri, April 17, 2009 4:13 am To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be> Cc: <council@gnso.icann.org> Hi Philip, On Apr 17, 2009, at 10:32 AM, Philip Sheppard wrote:

Further to my comments on the call yesterday allow me to clarify and make a proposal that may save us all a lot of time.

Background The BC supports a consideration of further RAA changes.

Question What is the best way to do this ?

Proposal 1. First, do fact finding and create a list of EXISTING registrants' rights including (and separating out) voluntary best practice (mostly a Registrars exercise).

Mostly but not exclusively, and there may be differences of interpretation as to what rights now exist under relevant consumer protection laws and guidelines, hard to know ex ante.

2. Create a second list of ADDITIONAL registrants' rights that registrants want (mostly a Users exercise).

Probably so, although it's at least possible other parties might see constructive grounds for additions.

3. Create a group to study the two lists and determine which of these additional rights and voluntary best practice CAN be implemented with new RAA changes (a joint users / suppliers exercise) ie POSSIBLE even if some opinions say UNDESIRABLE.

4. Then, NEGOTIATE on which of these additional rights will go forward to be implemented by RAA changes.

Presumably it would be the same group doing 3-4 that did 1-2?

That may be in the minds of those that drafted the RAA motion but as I said on the call, and from what I heard on the call, I detected a confusion in approach.

I didn't detect it; the process you describe seems pretty straightforward and consistent with what one would expect the group to be doing.

The key is to avoid negotiating too early or arguing over the content of a "charter of rights."

Again, hard to know before the fact whether there will be differences of view and how sharp these might be at each of the four steps, but if there are, arguing them out would seem necessary to me.

As said on the call I would strongly recommend changing the terminology.

Council agreed to do a charter and this is why the RAA amendments passed unanimously. We can't proceed on the basis of bait and switch. Best, Bill *********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************