Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions. --- Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, -- The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated. thanks a.
I agree Olga 2009/5/15 Avri Doria <avri@psg.com>
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions.
---
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards,
--
The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated.
thanks
a.
Avri Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO there's been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency and as a result we're unable to offer support for the letter. In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have expressed there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have to offer a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should be left to the Board. Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor amendment that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the abstention. Regards Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions. --- Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, -- The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated. thanks a.
sure thing. I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know if this assumption is in error in the next few hours. thanks a. Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:
Avri
Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO there's been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency and as a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.
In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have expressed there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have to offer a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should be left to the Board.
Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor amendment that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the abstention.
Regards
Tony
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions.
---
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards,
--
The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated.
thanks
a.
Avri and everyone, My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the letter. My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this list. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>>
sure thing. I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know if this assumption is in error in the next few hours. thanks a. Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:
Avri
Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO
there's been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency
and as a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.
In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have expressed there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have
to offer a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should
be left to the Board.
Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor amendment that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the abstention.
Regards
Tony
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions.
---
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards,
--
The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated.
thanks
a.
Thanks Mary. I had hoped that some of the edits made dealt with earlier concerns. Chuck ________________________________ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:47 PM To: Council GNSO; Avri Doria Subject: Re: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC Avri and everyone, My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the letter. My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this list. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 >>> Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>> sure thing. I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know if this assumption is in error in the next few hours. thanks a. Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote: > > Avri > > Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO > there's > been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency > and as > a result we're unable to offer support for the letter. > > In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have > expressed > there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have > to offer > a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should > be left > to the Board. > > Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor > amendment > that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers > Constituency to the abstention. > > Regards > > Tony > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org > ] On > Behalf Of Avri Doria > Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 > To: Council GNSO > Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC > > > I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would > especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, > Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on > your abstentions. > > --- > > Dear Janis, > > Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in > response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This > communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted > abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally > both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the > Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this > document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of > the IRT and have also abstained. > > Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment > at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue > with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. > > Best Regards, > > -- > > The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the > letter with changes accepted and date updated. > > thanks > > a. > > > > >
Im supportive also as long the abstaining causes/phrases are approved by those abstaining. Take care Terry From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 2:05 PM To: Mary Wong; Council GNSO; Avri Doria Subject: RE: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC Thanks Mary. I had hoped that some of the edits made dealt with earlier concerns. Chuck _____ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:47 PM To: Council GNSO; Avri Doria Subject: Re: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC Avri and everyone, My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the letter. My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this list. Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>>
sure thing. I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know if this assumption is in error in the next few hours. thanks a. Dear Janis, Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney. Best Regards, On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:
Avri
Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO there's been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency and as a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.
In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have expressed there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have to offer a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should be left to the Board.
Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor amendment that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the abstention.
Regards
Tony
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on your abstentions.
---
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of the IRT and have also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards,
--
The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated.
thanks
a.
Hi, I believe I had checked with each of them in response to their request for the abstention language. a. On 15 May 2009, at 23:53, Terry L Davis, P.E. wrote:
I’m supportive also as long the abstaining causes/phrases are approved by those abstaining.
Take care
Terry
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 2:05 PM To: Mary Wong; Council GNSO; Avri Doria Subject: RE: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
Thanks Mary. I had hoped that some of the edits made dealt with earlier concerns.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Mary Wong Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:47 PM To: Council GNSO; Avri Doria Subject: Re: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
Avri and everyone,
My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the letter.
My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this list.
Cheers Mary
Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Franklin Pierce Law Center Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: mwong@piercelaw.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>>
sure thing.
I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know if this assumption is in error in the next few hours.
thanks
a.
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards, On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:
Avri
Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO there's been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency and as a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.
In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have expressed there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have to offer a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should be left to the Board.
Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor amendment that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the abstention.
Regards
Tony
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC, Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included
your abstentions.
---
Dear Janis,
Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as
on part of
the IRT and have also abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
Best Regards,
--
The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the letter with changes accepted and date updated.
thanks
a.
participants (6)
-
Avri Doria -
Gomes, Chuck -
Mary Wong -
Olga Cavalli -
Terry L Davis, P.E. -
Tony Holmes