IPC Position on Reverse Adoption of GNSO Policy Recommendations
Fellow Councilors: I write to share the Intellectual Property Constituency’s stance on the proposed process for Reverse Adoption of GNSO Policy Recommendations. A copy of the IPC’s comment submitted in January is attached which lays out the IPCs’ position. The IPC doesn’t support this for two main reasons. First, having a formal policy in place at the Council level to unadopt policy recommendations supports and frankly encourages the idea that it’s acceptable to go through the lengthy and costly policy development process only wait so long to actually implement the policy that it’s either no longer fit for purpose (allegedly) or out of date. ICANN policy should be implemented as soon as possible and Council should encourage that—not have a built in off ramp to essentially nullify years of previous work. Second, an unadoption of policy is an issue that should be dealt with in the bylaws and by the empowered community—not by Council. Please review our attached comment for more information. I am certainly available to speak to anyone who has questions. Thanks, Damon J. Damon Ashcraft , P.C. O: 602.382.6389<tel:602.382.6389> | M: 602.510.1640<tel:602.510.1640> dashcraft@swlaw.com<mailto:dashcraft@swlaw.com> SNELL & WILMER swlaw.com<https://us.content.exclaimer.net?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.swlaw.com%2F&tenantid...> | LinkedIn<https://us.content.exclaimer.net?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompan...> One East Washington Street | Suite 2700 | Phoenix, AZ 85004‑2556 Albuquerque | Boise | Dallas | Denver | Las Vegas | Los Angeles | Los Cabos | Orange County | Palo Alto | Phoenix | Portland | Reno-Tahoe | Salt Lake City | San Diego | Seattle | Tucson | Washington, D.C. This email and any attachments may be confidential and protected by legal privilege. If you have received this message in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone. Please notify the sender by return email and delete this email as well as any attachments from your system.
Thank you Damon. It might also be useful to remind Councilors that this issue arose in Hamburg because the Board reversed a previously adopted Recommendation from the CCWG Auction Proceeds (Recommendation 7) and the Council wa formally advised in correspondence that there was no obligation to consult the GNSO in relation to the reversal because the CCWG Guidelines did not require it. Then there was a reversal of a previously adopted PDP Recommendation where notice was given to Council "after the fact". If memory serves, this was a Sub Pro Recommendation but I can't recall the details at the moment. I know that ICANN Legal has advised that this mechanism can be established via amendments to the PDP Manual and the GGP Manual, but it also appears that neither one of those documents provides a basis for Request For Reconsideration or Independent Review as do the Bylaws. Again, it is worth noting that nothing in the proposed PDP Manual and GGP Manual amendments addresses the issue of reversal of a Cross Community Working Group Recommendation which has been adopted by the Board and then reversed. It would be good to know whether the Board still takes the position that no notice to Council is required in this case. This could also be relevant to the work being done by the CCG on Review of Reviews where a body of SO/AC Leaders is being proposed as the body that would have the authority for scoping of reviews going forward. It's unclear whether that newly proposed body would be operating under CCWG Guidelines or some other construct, but obviously it would not operate under the PDP or GGP Manuals. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2026 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Wed, Apr 1, 2026 at 9:04 AM Ashcraft, Damon via council < council@icann.org> wrote:
Fellow Councilors:
I write to share the Intellectual Property Constituency’s stance on the proposed process for Reverse Adoption of GNSO Policy Recommendations. A copy of the IPC’s comment submitted in January is attached which lays out the IPCs’ position. The IPC doesn’t support this for two main reasons.
First, having a formal policy in place at the Council level to unadopt policy recommendations supports and frankly encourages the idea that it’s acceptable to go through the lengthy and costly policy development process only wait so long to actually implement the policy that it’s either no longer fit for purpose (allegedly) or out of date. ICANN policy should be implemented as soon as possible and Council should encourage that—not have a built in off ramp to essentially nullify years of previous work. Second, an unadoption of policy is an issue that should be dealt with in the bylaws and by the empowered community—not by Council. Please review our attached comment for more information.
I am certainly available to speak to anyone who has questions.
Thanks, Damon
*J. Damon Ashcraft*
*, P.C.*
********
*O: *
602.382.6389
|
*M: *
602.510.1640
dashcraft@swlaw.com
*SNELL*
*& WILMER*
swlaw.com <https://us.content.exclaimer.net?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.swlaw.com%2F&tenantid...> | LinkedIn <https://us.content.exclaimer.net?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fcompan...>
One East Washington Street | Suite 2700 | Phoenix, AZ 85004‑2556
Albuquerque *|* Boise *|* Dallas *|* Denver *|* Las Vegas *|* Los Angeles *|* Los Cabos *|* Orange County *|* Palo Alto *|* Phoenix *|* Portland *|* Reno-Tahoe *|* Salt Lake City *|* San Diego *|* Seattle *|* Tucson *|* Washington, D.C.
This email and any attachments may be confidential and protected by legal privilege. If you have received this message in error, please do not disclose the contents to anyone. Please notify the sender by return email and delete this email as well as any attachments from your system.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to 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)
-
Anne ICANN -
Ashcraft, Damon