- CWG-Stewardship - lists.icann.org

Latest Draft RZERC Charter
by Yuko Green July 28, 2016

July 28, 2016

Dear members of the CWG, During today's call, it was asked within the chat that ICANN circulate the latest draft RZERC Charter, which is attached to this e-mail. This is the version that was posted for the public comment. Regards, Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: yuko.green(a)icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

FW: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers
by Jonathan Robinson July 28, 2016

July 28, 2016

All, Please see below and attached for review and comments from Sidley on the Naming Function Agreement. Thank-you, Jonathan From: Hofheimer, Joshua T. [mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com] Sent: 28 July 2016 05:11 To: 'Client Committee' <cwg-client(a)icann.org> Cc: jrobinson(a)afilias.info; Resnick, Yael <yresnick(a)sidley.com>; Grapsas, Rebecca <rebecca.grapsas(a)sidley.com>; Flanagan, Sharon <sflanagan(a)sidley.com>; Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory(a)sidley.com>; Greeley, Amy E. <AGreeley(a)Sidley.com> Subject: RE: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Client Committee – Attached is a further revised draft of the Naming Functions Agreement. For convenience, we have included a clean version and two redlines – an incremental draft marked against the Sidley draft circulated per the email below, and a cumulative redline against the original ICANN-legal draft proposal. Regarding Annex C, on our review many of the concepts do appear to have been incorporated either into the Naming Functions Agreement or into the governance documents. We have added only a few suggested, additional clauses related to Annex C in the attached draft, along with mapping to the particular provision in the Annex. Thank you and speak to you tomorrow. Best regards, Josh Joshua Hofheimer Sidley Austin LLP jhofheimer(a)sidley.com <mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com> (213) 896-6061 (LA direct) (650) 565-7561 (Palo Alto direct) (323) 708-2405 (cell) From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 3:02 AM To: Hofheimer, Joshua T.; 'Client Committee' Cc: Greeley, Amy E. Subject: RE: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Dear Josh, My understanding is as follows: 1. That the CWG is agreed that the provisions of Annex C must be appropriately documented into the Naming Functions Agreement, PTI Bylaws or both. 2. Sidley have indicated that it will be satisfactory (in terms of the implementation of the CWG proposal) to have the provisions of Annex C appropriately documented into the Naming Functions Agreement or PTI Bylaws or both. 3. ICANN Legal have argued that they do not believe it is appropriate to have the provisions of Annex C documented in the PTI Bylaws. Therefore, A. It will be helpful to have you confirm that the above is consistent with your understanding and B. It seems to me to be certain that the provisions (that the CWG drafted to implement Annex C) must be incorporated into the Naming Functions Agreement Accordingly, it will be helpful to receive your review of the Naming Functions Agreement against Annex C as soon as possible and/or proposed revision of the Naming Functions Agreement in order to achieve the appropriate documentation of Annex C . Thank-you. Jonathan From: Hofheimer, Joshua T. [mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com] Sent: 26 July 2016 02:20 To: Client Committee <cwg-client(a)icann.org> Cc: Greeley, Amy E. <AGreeley(a)sidley.com <mailto:AGreeley@sidley.com> > Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Client Committee -- Attached is a further revised draft of Sidley’s comments to the Naming Functions Agreement. For convenience, we have included a clean Word version, a cumulative PDF redline against the ICANN draft, and an internal redline against the version we sent yesterday. Please note, we have not undertaken a formal review of the Naming Functions Agreement against Annex C. We are looking for guidance from the CWG as to whether the provisions that the CWG drafted to implement Annex C (as described in the Implementation Proposal dated June 9, 2016) will be incorporated in the bylaws or the naming function agreement. Once this determination is made, we can ensure that the provisions are appropriately documented, if requested. Cheers, Josh Joshua Hofheimer Sidley Austin LLP <mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com> jhofheimer(a)sidley.com (213) 896-6061 (LA direct) (650) 565-7561 (Palo Alto direct) (323) 708-2405 (cell)

1 0

FW: ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers
by Lise Fuhr July 28, 2016

July 28, 2016

Dear All, Please see the attached Naming Functions Agreement which the comments from Sidley. We have a CWG call on Thursday where we can discuss the issues raised by Sidley. Best, Lise From: cwg-client-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:cwg-client-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Hofheimer, Joshua T. Sent: 26 July 2016 03:20 To: Client Committee Cc: Greeley, Amy E. Subject: Re: [client com] ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Client Committee -- Attached is a further revised draft of Sidley’s comments to the Naming Functions Agreement. For convenience, we have included a clean Word version, a cumulative PDF redline against the ICANN draft, and an internal redline against the version we sent yesterday. Please note, we have not undertaken a formal review of the Naming Functions Agreement against Annex C. We are looking for guidance from the CWG as to whether the provisions that the CWG drafted to implement Annex C (as described in the Implementation Proposal dated June 9, 2016) will be incorporated in the bylaws or the naming function agreement. Once this determination is made, we can ensure that the provisions are appropriately documented, if requested. Cheers, Josh Joshua Hofheimer Sidley Austin LLP jhofheimer(a)sidley.com (213) 896-6061 (LA direct) (650) 565-7561 (Palo Alto direct) (323) 708-2405 (cell) From: Hofheimer, Joshua T. Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 12:50 PM To: 'Client Committee' Cc: Resnick, Yael; Flanagan, Sharon; Gregory, Holly; Grapsas, Rebecca; Greeley, Amy E. Subject: RE: ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Dear Client Committee – If you have not already started reviewing the attached, please hold for a few hours. We will have a revised draft to you shortly with further observations on the connections to the ICANN Bylaws, and some additional revisions. Thanks, Josh Joshua Hofheimer Sidley Austin LLP jhofheimer(a)sidley.com<mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com> (213) 896-6061 (LA direct) (650) 565-7561 (Palo Alto direct) (323) 708-2405 (cell) From: Hofheimer, Joshua T. Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2016 4:02 PM To: Client Committee Cc: Resnick, Yael; Flanagan, Sharon; Gregory, Holly; Grapsas, Rebecca; Greeley, Amy E. Subject: ICANN-PTI Naming Functions Agreement & Services Agreement Headers Dear Client Committee, Attached please find proposed comments to the Naming Functions Agreement and the Services Agreement Headers, both clean and marked against the versions sent by ICANN. Because the Services Agreement Headers received from ICANN was in PDF only, we converted to Word and added formatting. However, this has made the redline look more atrocious than it actually is. We are going to try to clean this up a little in the versions to go to ICANN, but did not want to delay getting feedback or comments from the community. On the Naming Functions Agreement, we focused primarily on verifying the mapping exercise undertaken by ICANN to ensure the CWG’s views and conditions have been incorporated. Where the proposed draft appears to be lacking or inconsistent, we have noted with questions, comments, and in some instances direct revisions. Cheers, Josh JOSHUA T. HOFHEIMER Partner SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP +1 650 565 7561 (PA direct) +1 213 896 6061 (LA direct) +1 323 708 2405 (Cell) jhofheimer(a)sidley.com<mailto:jhofheimer@sidley.com> www.sidley.com<http://www.sidley.com> [Image removed by sender. SIDLEY] **************************************************************************************************** This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us immediately. ****************************************************************************************************

3 2

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI
by 'ajs＠anvilwalrusden.com' July 27, 2016

July 27, 2016

No objection here. On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:01:49PM +0000, Flanagan, Sharon wrote: > Dear all- > > Below is proposed language for the PTI purpose that Sidley and ICANN legal worked through. We believe this language captures the intent of the CWG proposal while also meeting the tax requirements for a non-profit "supporting organization". > > Best regards, > Sharon > > > "The specific purpose of the corporation is to operate exclusively to carry out the purposes of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) by performing the IANA functions on behalf of ICANN." > > Sharon R. Flanagan > Sidley Austin LLP > SF tel: 415-772-1271 > PA tel: 650-565-7008 > Email: sflanagan(a)sidley.com > > > From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 12:49 PM > To: matthew shears <mshears(a)cdt.org>; Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> > Cc: Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr(a)difo.dk>; Andrew Sullivan <ajs(a)anvilwalrusden.com>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>; jrobinson(a)afilias.info <jrobinson(a)afilias.info>; Flanagan, Sharon > Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI > > Let’s let Sharon and Sam help us word this as planned on the call yesterday. > > Chuck > > From: matthew shears [mailto:mshears@cdt.org] > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 1:07 PM > To: Seun Ojedeji > Cc: Lise Fuhr; Andrew Sullivan; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; jrobinson(a)afilias.info; Flanagan, Sharon; Gomes, Chuck > Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI > > > Not sure I see the need or value of that additional clause. Unless there is a very good legal reason for doing so we should avoid layering this with unnecessary qualifiers. > > On 20/07/2016 17:51, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > That could work as well(even though I prefer Andrew's modification), but not without including "...exclusively for the benefit of,.." in the text which will then result to the following: > > "The specific purpose of the corporation is to perform the IANA functions on behalf of, and exclusively for the benefit of, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“*ICANN*”)." > > That ensures that PTI remains member(i.e ICANN) driven. > > Regards > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > On 20 Jul 2016 5:41 p.m., "matthew shears" <mshears(a)cdt.org<mailto:mshears@cdt.org>> wrote: > > I'm wondering if we even need to go to that next level. In the Services Agreement draft it says: "WHEREAS, following the IANA Stewardship Transition, PTI will perform the IANA > functions on behalf of ICANN;" > > So rather than making it more vague/complicated than necessary, why wouldn't the PTI bylaws state the following: > > "The specific purpose of the corporation is to perform the IANA functions on behalf of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“*ICANN*”)." > > That is its purpose. Thanks. > > Matthew > > > On 20/07/2016 17:18, Jonathan Robinson wrote: > > Copying in Sharon from Sidley as suggested by Greg on yesterday's CWG call. > > > > Jonathan > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] > > Sent: 19 July 2016 14:31 > > To: 'Andrew Sullivan' <ajs(a)anvilwalrusden.com><mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> > > Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI > > > > Andrew's suggestion works for me. > > > > Chuck > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:26 AM > > To: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> > > Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI > > > > I think you are rapidly walking in to angry terminological disputes that will delay the incorporation of PTI. > > > > What about saying something like "relating to certain Internet registries and certain Internet Domain Name System zones, consistent with ICANN's Mission," or something like that? > > > > A > > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 09:22:53AM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote: > > I suggest considering something more specific than "relating to IANA > > services" (especially since the second word in the paragraph is > > "specific") in stating the purpose of PTI, since "IANA services" is > > not a defined term nor is it self-explanatory. Rather it is a "term > > of art," and undefined terms of art are generally to be avoided > > wherever possible in drafting legal documents. > > > > We could use the current statement of purpose in the ICANN Articles as > > a jumping off point, i.e.: > > > > The specific purpose of the Corporation is to operate exclusively for > > the benefit of, to perform the functions of and to carry out the > > purposes of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers > > (“*ICANN*”), namely (i) coordinating the assignment of Internet > > technical parameters as needed to maintain universal connectivity on > > the Internet; (ii) performing and overseeing functions related to the coordination of the Internet Protocol (" > > *IP*") address space; (iii) performing and overseeing functions > > related to the coordination of the Internet domain name system > > ("*DNS*"); and (iv) overseeing operation of the authoritative Internet DNS root server system. > > > > I recognize that we'll probably want to change some of the verbs here > > to more accurately reflect ICANN/IANA's role vs. that of the IETF and > > RIRs, but I think this provides a good starting place for an > > appropriately specific statement of purpose. > > > > Greg > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Sivasubramanian M > > <isolatedn(a)gmail.com><mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Dear Chuck, > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes(a)verisign.com><mailto:cgomes@verisign.com> wrote: > > > > Would it work to make the following change:? “The specific purpose > > of the Corporation is to operate exclusively for the benefit of, to > > perform the functions of and to carry out the purposes of the > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“*ICANN*”) related to the IANA services.” > > > > Even without the change, 'related to IANA services' is implied, > > but there is no harm in saying it explicitly. When PTI operates for > > the benefit of ICANN, and ICANN is built up on the foundation of a > > fair accountability framework it, it necessarily follows that PTI > > would act in global public interest. > > > > Sivasubramanian M > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Matthew that it is not PTI’s purpose to perform all of > > ICANN’s functions and purposes. > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > *From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org> [mailto: > > cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *matthew shears > > *Sent:* Friday, July 15, 2016 5:28 AM > > *To:* Yuko Green; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org> > > *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Purpose of PTI > > > > > > > > Hi Yuko - thanks. > > > > As I noted in the CWG chat yesterday I am uncomfortable with this > > definition of the purpose of PTI: "The specific purpose of the > > Corporation is to operate exclusively for the benefit of, to > > perform the functions of and to carry out the purposes of the > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“*ICANN*”)." > > > > This is very broad and very vague. My understanding was that the > > purpose of the PTI subsidiary was to perform the IANA functions > > pursuant to an inter-company contract established between ICANN and > > PTI. This is very different from the proposed language. Of course > > we also need to see the inter company agreement to ensure that the > > purpose of PTI is similarly parametered. > > > > Matthew > > > > > > > > On 14/07/2016 19:00, Yuko Green wrote: > > > > Dear members of the CWG, > > > > > > > > From today’s CWG call #82, we stated that we will provide the > > transcript from the IOTF call where we discussed about the purpose > > stated within the PTI Bylaws and Articles. Extracted below is the > > transcript and chat history specifically around this topic. The > > whole transcript is available at > > https://www.icann.org/uploads/iana_work_session_asset/attachment/37<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_uploads_…> > > 3/1467913551526IOTF_Call__14_transcript_06JUL16.pdf > > and the AC room recording at https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p3qeid579y7/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icann.adobeconnect.com…>. > > > > > > > > > > ****Transcript**** > > > > > > > > Paul Kane: In the articles of association, it says the sole > > function – apparently I haven’t read it, again I apologize – > > function of PTI is to serve ICANN. Historically the function of > > IANA has been to serve the community, ICANN just happens to be the > > contract to doing it. And I don’t know if that is correct, if that’s what’s in the articles of incorporation. > > But if that is, it sort of has lost the raison d’etre of PTI. It is > > not a service sector of ICANN because that makes it feel like a > > department. It’s actually trying to serve a broader community such > > as the naming community, the protocols and the numbers. But I > > haven’t read it so I will try and read it so I might be wrong. > > > > > > > > Trang Nguyen: Thanks, Paul. Let me – so Section 3 of the articles > > says this – it does say that the specific purpose of PTI is to > > operate exclusively for the benefit of and to perform the functions > > of and carry out the purposes of ICANN. And I want to go back and > > double check that again the language that is in the ICANN bylaws > > that has been adopted because I think some of this is the > > reflection of what’s included in the ICANN bylaws. So we want to do > > that cross check and come back to this group and see how it aligns > > with – what’s in the ICANN bylaws. But that is currently what is > > reflected in the PTI articles of incorporation. There are some > > comments in the chat from James. Things that affect the agreement > > are done by contract with ICANN for protocol and numbers means that > > there needs to be language to that effect in the PTI articles… > > > > > > > > James Gannon: So, yes, Paul, I had a similar comment from somebody > > else as well from the IETF area. And I think in I suppose > > philosophical principle, yes, it is a slight change but I think in > > the reality the fact that both the numbers and protocol communities > > will still contract with ICANN it needs to be very clear in PTI’s > > documents then that, yes, it is for the purposes of fulfilling the > > IANA functions it needs to be able to serve the owners of those > > contracts, which is ICANN still. So I think philosophically, yes, > > it doesn’t really sound very right, but I think for the realities > > of running PTI and for PTI to be accountable through the mechanisms > > that we’ve built up that there does need to be language like that > > inside the articles to make sure that it’s clear that the – those > > two communities have the right of PTI serving their needs but also > > then the accountability mechanism that we’ve put into ICANN are > > also then bound to PTI by that language going backwards. And I think Trang is right that it’s also reflected in the ICANN bylaws going downwards towards PTI. > > > > > > > > Trang Nguyen: Thank you, James. And I see Russ has similar comments > > in the chat as well that the contract for the protocol parameters > > function as well as with the numbers are with ICANN and not PTI. > > > > > > > > > > > > ****Chat**** > > > > > > > > Trang Nguyen: The specific purpose of the Corporation is to > > operate exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions > > of, and to carry out the purposes of the Internet Corporation for > > Assigned Names and Numbers, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation(“ICANN”). > > > > > > > > James Gannon: I think this was Stephens comment yes? I think that > > the fact that the agreements are done via contact to ICANN for > > protocol and numbers means that there needs to be language to that > > effect in the PTI articles > > > > > > > > James Gannon: (Sorry no mic) > > > > > > > > Paul Kane: A cross check is welcome but I hope you see my point it > > is off target > > > > > > > > Russ Housley: @Paul, the Numbers and Protocol Parameter communities > > have their agreements with ICANN, not PTI. > > > > > > > > Paul Kane: Good Point Russ > > > > > > > > Russ Housley: @Paul, ICANN is choosing to put that work in PTI. > > > > > > > > Russ Housley: @Paul, so PTI is an affiliate of ICANN to perform all > > of that work > > > > > > > > Paul Kane: ok -thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > *Yuko Green* > > > > Strategic Programs Manager > > > > Global Domains Division > > > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > > > > > > > Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693<tel:%2B1%20310%20578%208693> > > > > Mobile: +1 310 745 1517<tel:%2B1%20310%20745%201517> > > > > E-mail: yuko.green(a)icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> > > > > www.icann.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=CwMGaQ&…> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > -------------- > > > > Matthew Shears > > > > Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > > > > Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) > > > > + 44 771 2472987<tel:%2B%2044%20771%202472987> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiviru…> > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > www.avast.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.avast.com&d=CwMGaQ&…> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiviru…> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > > > > > -- > > Sivasubramanian M > > <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_sivas…> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > -- > > Andrew Sullivan > > ajs(a)anvilwalrusden.com<mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > -- > > > > -------------- > > Matthew Shears > > Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > > Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) > > + 44 771 2472987<tel:%2B%2044%20771%202472987> > > _______________________________________________ > CWG-Stewardship mailing list > CWG-Stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l…> > > > > -- > > > > -------------- > > Matthew Shears > > Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > > Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) > > + 44 771 2472987 > > > > **************************************************************************************************** > This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. > If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us > immediately. > > **************************************************************************************************** -- Andrew Sullivan ajs(a)anvilwalrusden.com

6 5

IANA Stewardship Transition Implementation Planning Update (Volume 4)
by Yuko Green July 26, 2016

July 26, 2016

Original link: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/iana-stewardship-transition-implementation-… IANA Stewardship Transition Implementation Planning Update (Volume 4) ICANN is compiling updates on the progress of the IANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability implementation planning efforts. This information is positioned to help inform interested stakeholders on the recent developments in the processes, upcoming key dates, and latest documents and drafts that occur over the timeframe. Root Zone Management The Root Zone Management implementation planning track contains projects relating to changes to the root zone management system (RZMS) to remove NTIA's authorization role, parallel testing of the production and parallel test RZMS, and the development and execution of an agreement with Verisign as the root zone maintainer. Root Zone Management System (RZMS) Changes to Remove Root Zone Administrator (RZA) Role and Support Parallel Testing Status update: On 6 July 2016, ICANN and Verisign successfully completed<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-14-en> the 90-day parallel testing period of theRoot Zone Management System (RZMS). During the testing period, zero unexplained differences were found between the production RZMS and the parallel test version of the RZMS, which has the U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) authorization step removed. You can view daily comparison reports<http://www.verisign.com/rzms-parallel-ops/index.html> created during the testing period on Verisign's website. Additionally, monthly progress reports for the testing period are available on ICANN's designated Root Zone Management System Parallel Testing webpage<https://www.icann.org/en/stewardship-implementation/root-zone-management-sy…>. Documents/announcements posted: 90-day Root Zone Management System "Parallel Testing" Period Ends Successfully<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-14-en> Verisign Daily Parallel Operations Root Zone Management System Comparisons<http://www.verisign.com/rzms-parallel-ops/index.html> Second RZMS Monthly Progress Report <https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/55-rzms-parallel-testing-monthly-report…> Root Zone Maintainer Agreement (RZMA) Status update: ICANN and Verisign have completed<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/root-zone-management-transition-update-pres…> the discussions and negotiations for the Root Zone Maintainer Services Agreement (RZMA). On 29 June 2016, ICANN published the RZMA<https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/63-root-zone-maintainer-agreement-v-1-0> for a 30-day public review period. Documents/announcements posted: Root Zone Management Transition Update: Preservation of Security, Stability and Resiliency<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/root-zone-management-transition-update-pres…> Root Zone Maintainer Services Agreement<https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/63-root-zone-maintainer-agreement-v-1-0> ________________________________ Stewardship Transition The Stewardship Transition planning track contains projects to prepare agreements with the operational communities, creation of a Post-Transition IANA (PTI) entity, establishment of a Customer Standing Committee (CSC) and a Root Zone Evolution Review Committee (RZERC), operationalizing the IANA customer service escalation mechanisms and Service Level Agreements (SLAs). Service Level Expectations (SLEs) for Naming Community Status update: As noted previously, ICANN has been collecting SLE data over the past 3 ½ months in order to propose performance targets to the SLE Design Team of the Cross Community Working Group Names (CWG-Stewardship) for their consideration. An analysis of the aggregated data, as well as ICANN's proposed thresholds for the SLEs, are provided in a summary report<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160715/92175b9a…> that was circulated to the community last week. ICANN will be holding a call this week to discuss the report and demo the dashboard that will be used to report on PTI's actual performance against agreed-to thresholds with the CWG-Stewardship, Documents/announcements posted: Preliminary Review of Service Level Expectation Data<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160715/92175b9a…> Mailing list: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt1 Service Level Agreement (SLA) for the IANA Numbering Services Status update: ICANN and the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) have signed<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-06-29-en> the SLA for the IANA Numbering Services<https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/ICANN-RIR-SLA-signature25May16.pdf>. The agreement will become effective on the date of the transition. Documents/announcements posted: ICANN Signs Service Level Agreement with Regional Internet Registries and Finalizes 2016 Supplemental Agreement with Internet Engineering Task Force<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-06-29-en> Mailing list: https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/ Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Supplemental Agreement for the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Status update: ICANN has signed the 2016 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Supplemental Agreement with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)<https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/59-2016-icann-ietf-mou-supplemental-agr…> for the performance of the protocol parameters functions. The agreement will become effective on the date of the transition. Documents/announcements posted: ICANN Signs Service Level Agreement with Regional Internet Registries and Finalizes 2016 Supplemental Agreement with Internet Engineering Task Force<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-06-29-en> Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Supplemental Agreement with the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)<https://www.icann.org/iana_imp_docs/59-2016-icann-ietf-mou-supplemental-agr…> Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Status update: The deadline for appointing organizations to send candidate selections is Friday, 22 July 2016. ICANNwill then forward the appointments to the ccNSO and GNCO Councils for final approval of the full CSC membership. Documents/announcements posted: None. Mailing list: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/ http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf Root Zone Evolution Review Committee (RZERC) Status update: A public comment period on the RZERC draft charter was closed on 10 July 2016. In total, 7 individuals and organizations submitted comments<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-rzerc-charter-2016-06-10-en>. ICANN staff is currently finalizing an analysis of the comments received. ICANN hopes to be able to begin forming the committee soon. The RZERC will become operational upon the successful completion of the transition. Documents/announcements posted: None. Mailing list: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/ http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf/ Post-transition IANA (PTI) Status update: There are currently three public comment periods underway for the formation of PTI. Any interested party may review and provide feedback on these important PTI formation documents. 1) Draft PTI Articles of Incorporation<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-pti-articles-incorporation-2016…> The proposed draft of the PTI Articles of Incorporation was developed to meet the community proposal recommendation that a new legal entity be formed to perform the three IANA functions. The Articles were drafted to the ICG and CWG-Stewardship proposals, which were developed through public processes, and adopted by the ICANN Board and transmitted to NTIA on 10 March 2016. The public comment process provides the community with an opportunity to comment on whether the drafted Articles are inconsistent with the proposals, and is not intended to be a forum for the reconsideration of the proposals. Closes: 31 July 2016 at 23:59 UTC 2) PTI Governance Documents<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/pti-governance-documents-2016-07-08-en> The governance documents include the: · Draft PTI Conflict of Interest Policy · Draft PTI Board Code of Conduct · Draft PTI Expected Standard of Behavior The Conflict of Interest Policy and Board Code of Conduct were developed to strengthen PTI's governance practices, and the Expected Standard of Behavior was developed to guide PTI's Board, staff, customers and broader community on expected standards to guide their participation. Each of these documents is modeled off of the versions already in force in ICANN, and the public comment period is intended to seek comments on conformance of these documents to PTI. Closes: 7 August 2016 at 23:59 UTC 3) Draft PTI Bylaws<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-pti-bylaws-2016-07-12-en> PTI Bylaws contains PTI's governance requirements, including composition of the Board, conduct of Board meetings, powers of the Board and PTI officers, and budgeting, planning and record keeping requirements. The Bylaws were drafted to meet the ICG and CWG-Stewardship proposals, which were developed through public processes, and adopted by the ICANN Board and transmitted to NTIA on 10 March 2016. The public comment process provides the community with an opportunity to comment on whether the drafted Bylaws are inconsistent with the proposals, and is not intended to be a forum for the reconsideration of the proposals. Closes: 11 August 2016 at 23:59 UTC In addition, ICANN has circulated to the community drafts of the ICANN-PTI contracts for review, including: · Draft Naming Function Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> · Draft Number Subcontracting Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> · Draft Protocol Parameter Subcontracting Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> · Draft ICANN-PTI Intercompany Services Agreement headers<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> Documents/announcements posted: Draft PTI Articles of Incorporation<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-pti-articles-incorporatio…> Draft PTI Bylaws<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-pti-bylaws-12jul16-en.pdf> Draft PTI Conflict of Interest Policy<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-pti-coi-08jul16-en.pdf> Draft PTI Board Code of Conduct<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-pti-code-of-conduct-08jul…> Draft PTI Expected Standard of Behavior<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/draft-pti-expected-standards-08…> Draft Naming Function Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> Draft Number Subcontracting Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> Draft Protocol Parameter Subcontracting Agreement<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> Draft ICANN-PTI Intercompany Services Agreement Headers<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160716/63d8860e…> Mailing list: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/ http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iotf/ ________________________________ Accountability Enhancements The Accountability Enhancements Planning track contains projects to plan for implementation of enhancements to ICANN's Independent Review and Reconsideration Request processes, to update ICANN's governance documents, and to operationalize new community powers defined by the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability). ICANN's Updated Articles of Incorporation Status update: The 40-day public comment period on ICANN's Draft Restated Articles of Incorporation was extended by one week, and closed on 13 July 2016. In total, 6 submissions<https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-restated-articles-incorporatio…> were received during the comment period. ICANN staff is currently finalizing an analysis of the comments received. Documents/announcements posted: None. Mailing list: None. Independent Review Process (IRP) Status update: The CCWG-Accountability formed a Working Party called the IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IOT)<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=59643726>to define supplemental procedures for the enhanced IRP process defined by the CCWG-Accountability in its Work Stream 1 proposal. The IOT has held 5 meetings and all resources and archives can be found here<https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/IRP-IOT+Meetings>. Documents/announcements posted: None. Mailing list: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/

1 0

Agenda for CWG meeting (28 July @14:00 UTC)
by Yuko Green July 26, 2016

July 26, 2016

Dear members of the CWG, Please see below the proposed agenda for the call: Proposed Agenda: 1. Status Update (Chairs) 2. Implementation Update (Staff) 3. Key Issues (with Sidley) * PTI Articles of Incorporation * PTI Governance Documents o Conflict of Interest Policy o Board Code of Conduct o Expected Standard of Behavior * PTI Bylaws * Naming Functions Agreement (including Annex C?) * Services Agreement (headers now available) * IANA IPR 4. Client Committee 5. AOB To aid our discussion for our call, please find below the action items from our last meeting on 19 July: * In Progress (ICANN Legal): Review Sidley's comments on 3 governance documents and bring version 2 documents to CWG for review * ACTION (CWG): Review the recirculated Annex C table before the next CWG meeting/s * COMPLETED (ICANN): Circulate the RZERC qualification to CWG mail list * COMPLETED (Chairs): Confirm next meeting/s date and time Links to documents and open public comment periods: * PTI Articles of Incorporation (Comment closes 31 July): https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-pti-articles-incorporation-2016… * PTI Governance Documents (07 August): https://www.icann.org/public-comments/pti-governance-documents-2016-07-08-en * PTI Bylaws (11 August): https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-pti-bylaws-2016-07-12-en * Annex C table: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/Change-Pro%20Redl… Regards, Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: yuko.green(a)icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
by Xavier J. Calvez July 25, 2016

July 25, 2016

Brett et al, I hoping to be able to provide a response by end of day tomorrow, if not, on Wednesday. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> Date: Monday, July 25, 2016 at 11:29 AM To: Zakir Syed <zakirbinrehman(a)yahoo.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com>, Sam Lanfranco <sam(a)lanfranco.net>, Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs(a)afilias.info>, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com>, Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> Cc: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, Are you planning to answer the questions raised in this thread? Thanks, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: Zakir Syed [mailto:zakirbinrehman@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 4:07 PM To: Marilyn Cade; Sam Lanfranco; Phil Corwin; Ken Stubbs; Paul Rosenzweig; Schaefer, Brett; 'Xavier J. Calvez' Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; 'CCWG-Accountability'; icann-board(a)icann.org; 'Executive Team'; 'COMMS Team'; community-finance(a)icann.org; 'Finance Staff' Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update This is very useful discussion particularly on this very list. Any idea, how are the consultants/contractors hired by ICANN?. If this is through an RFP/competitive bid thn may be the RFP will have the detail/requirement what is required which in other words will mean what the consultants do. Not? Zakir ________________________________ From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> To: Sam Lanfranco <sam(a)lanfranco.net<mailto:sam@lanfranco.net>>; Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>>; Ken Stubbs <kstubbs(a)afilias.info<mailto:kstubbs@afilias.info>>; Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>>; "'Schaefer, Brett'" <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:brett.schaefer@heritage.org>>; 'Xavier J. Calvez' <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Cc: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>; 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>>; "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>; 'Executive Team' <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>; 'COMMS Team' <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>; "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>; 'Finance Staff' <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 2:27 AM Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update I'd like to stick to the topic we are discussing which is disclosure about 'advisors', and lobbyists, and not venture until the gTLDs contracts. I fear that would become a bog that is too unbounded, with some questioning the marketing plans of different gTLDs, like give aways, etc. So, I ask that as this is the CCWG-ACCT, and the topic is about the amounts paid for consultants specifically working on the IANA transition -- and who they are -- and that they have only ICANN as a client, not also members of ICANN's community on directly related subjects -- we stick to that discussion. All law firms in the US 'clear' conflicts before accepting a new client, and all corporations 'clear' their consultants. While this may be confidential in both these cases, I do agree that a public interest NGO, which is what ICANN is, can best serve itself, and the interest of the broader ICANN community by as much transparency as possible. BUT let's keep it high level and civil in our request for facts and figures. As I like to say: Facts are our friends. Of course, some issues have to be kept confidential. Who the consultants are has been published, what they were paid would add to the transparency. What they do, at a high level, should be published as well. I will say again that I think that the work is probably much needed. I spend a lot of time -- without being paid -- explaining ICANN as I do my other IG work and it is is a worthwhile task and an important one if we are to demystify ICANN to RoW [Rest of World]. I am sure it is all above board, but it has now taken on a sort of taint of 'why not tell'. Let's keep this high level and not make it a hunt for the details, but just get the high level facts, and make that a standard. Will help us all. M ________________________________ Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update To: psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>; kstubbs(a)afilias.info<mailto:kstubbs@afilias.info>; paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>; marilynscade(a)hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>; brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:brett.schaefer@heritage.org>; xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org> CC: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>; commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org> From: sam(a)lanfranco.net<mailto:sam@lanfranco.net> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:23:12 -0400 As the non-lawyer economist here I would like to observe that the discussion has honed in on a specific enough question, one that has an ICANN definitive answer, and that it should be put both to the Board and the new CEO for a an answer and clarification. I previously worried that the ICANN DNS contract with .sucks seemed to verge on ICANN exposing itself to the RICO act in the U.S., given the .sucks marketing plan. Maybe I am overly cautious but as a not-for-profit corporation operating in the public interest ICANN is more than obliged to provide clarity here. Silence won't do. Sam Lanfranco, NPOC/CSIH On 7/20/2016 12:06 PM, Phil Corwin wrote: If the contract non-disclosure clause indeed violates IRS disclosure requirements then how could ICANN legal agree to it? Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@afilias.info] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 11:37 AM To: Paul Rosenzweig; 'Marilyn Cade'; Phil Corwin; 'Schaefer, Brett'; 'Xavier J. Calvez' Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; 'CCWG-Accountability'; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; 'Executive Team'; 'COMMS Team'; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; 'Finance Staff' Subject: Re: [community-finance] [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update I believe Lori is correct here. IRS requirements on disclosures are usually quite specific here Ken Stubbs On 7/20/16 10:32, Lori Schulman wrote: I don’t believe that 501©3 orgs can consider any consulting fees confidential as the top fees are required to be reported on the 990. Lori Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 10:16 AM To: 'Marilyn Cade' <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com><mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>; 'Phil Corwin' <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com><mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>; 'Schaefer, Brett' <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org><mailto:brett.schaefer@heritage.org>; 'Xavier J. Calvez' <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org><mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org> Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org><mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; 'Executive Team' <executive-team(a)icann.org><mailto:executive-team@icann.org>; 'COMMS Team' <commsteam(a)icann.org><mailto:commsteam@icann.org>; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; 'Finance Staff' <finance-staff(a)icann.org><mailto:finance-staff@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update I agree completely with Marilyn and Phil. I have been on both sides of non-disclosure agreements – both ones requested by me and ones requested by my clients. Typically, a client (in the position of ICANN) may request that a consultant sign an NDA so as to protect the confidentiality of its efforts or its intellectual property. Sometimes a consultant might have a proprietary methodology or process that they are using on behalf of the client that they wish to protect. Neither circumstance applies here that I can see. And in no case that I am aware of has a client ever asked me to keep confidential my fee … I don’t broadcast them, but I’m in the private sector. For ICANN, which is an NGO acting in the global public interest, I cannot see any reason at all why ICANN would want or agree to a confidentiality arrangement as to the size of the fee paid. Xavier – can you tell us what the rationale is? I may be missing something ….. Thanks Paul Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 www.redbranchconsulting.com<http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 9:05 AM To: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>>; Schaefer, Brett <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:brett.schaefer@heritage.org>>; Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>>; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>; COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update I support Phil's clarifying explanation. I also think that anyone who is in this category, should have to declare if they re also representing companies in a SO/AC. Or advising governments. In the BC, we do not allow an ICANN consultant to be a BC member, regardless of the amount, but if someone is a backdoor advisor to ICANN and also a group of entities, in a SO/AC, that would not be so obvious, but I think that for integrity sake, of course, any such entity would recuse themselves from advising companies, while also advising ICANN. And I would expect ICANN to disqualify such entities as their consultants. Thanks, Phil, for this useful clarification. M ________________________________ From: psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com> To: Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>; xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:48:08 +0000 CC: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>; commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update In the U.S. much of what used to be done by registered lobbyists is now performed by “strategic advisors” who walk right up to the line of what constitutes lobbying (and maybe a few inches over), and nonetheless facilitate door opening to key members of Congress and the Executive branch, and who “educate” rather than “lobby” members of both branches of government. So while the seven firms may not be engaged in what is considered lobbying under current U.S. law, they are still likely engaged in helping to assure officials outcomes desired by ICANN corporate. It is for that reason – as well as for the exercise of effective oversight over ICANN budgeting and expenditures – that the community should have more data on this. If ICANN is prohibited by its contracts with these firms from disclosing its expenditures that is unfortunate – and in the future I would hope that ICANN would tell any firms being considered for such duties that its own transparency obligations to the community preclude it from agreeing to such restrictions (I’d wager that the majority of the firms would waive confidentiality rather than lose the contract). At a minimum, ICANN should disclose the aggregate amounts spent with these seven firms since they were engaged – surely their contracts don’t bar such aggregate reporting. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Schaefer, Brett Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 1:04 PM To: Xavier J. Calvez Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Executive Team; COMMS Team; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; Finance Staff Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, Are you saying that ICANN’s contracts for Education/Engagement/Advice with (1) Albright Stonebridge Group LLC, (2) Edelman, (3) Interface Media, (4) Rice Hadley Gates LLC, (5) Summit Strategies International LLC, (6) WBC Global, and (7) Wiley Rein LLP each contain confidentiality provisions that prohibit ICANN from disclosing the specific amount paid to each of these individual vendors? Does this only apply to the CCWG and the public or does it also apply to other parts of the ICANN community, specifically the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees? Thank you for the link on lobbying disclosures. For those who are interested, here are ICANN’s lobbying expenditures based on the disclosure website of the U.S. Congress. [cid:image001.png@01D1E67B.9D839FF0] I do have a couple of additional questions. Would this source capture lobbying exclusively directed toward the US Executive Branch? Has ICANN spent any funds during this period lobbying governments other than the US? Thank you, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: Xavier J. Calvez [mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 6:30 PM To: Schaefer, Brett Cc: community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability; Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Finance Staff Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Brett, Yes, the information I provided in my latest email had been included in some previous communication. I just wanted to make sure you had a clear visibility on this information, which provides for (i) categories of expenses, (ii) the individual names of the vendors grouped for each category, and (iii) the total value of the expenses for each category. With respect to the contractual obligations of confidentiality in commercial contracts, ICANN is subject to them, like all business organizations. That said, we disclose what we can consistent with standard business confidentiality provisions in vendor contracts. We cannot disclose the specific amount of spend with each vendor but we were able to disclose the names of the service providers engaged. Regarding the lobbying expenses, as you are aware, both organizations that hire lobbyists and firms that lobby on behalf of organizations are required under U.S. federal law to file lobbying disclosure reports. In addition to ICANN’s quarterly lobbying disclosures posted on our website, you can find the amounts ICANN has paid to individual outside lobbying firms at http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx. I hope this helps and clarifies. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>> Date: Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 7:07 AM To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Cc: "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>>, Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>, "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, This is pretty much the same information that was provided before. I am asking for a breakdown of how much was paid to each vender in the lobbying category (Akin Gump, etc.) and the education/engagement/advice category (Albright Stoneridge, etc.). Thank you, Brett On Jul 13, 2016, at 8:13 PM, Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Brett, In response to your question listed below on 22 June: the detailed information provided on Other professional fees (other than legal fees, detailed in a separate section of the “Transition project cost” expense webpage, on the IANA Stewardship Transition webpage) can be found in the section called “Professional Services – Expenses Breakdown”. Within this section, you will find a link to a document that provides the list of Professional Services (other than legal fees) incurred, by category, with the names of the vendors, and the total amount of expenditures for the category. This link is copied below and was provided in my first answer to your question. I have also attached the file to which this link refers in case the link would not work for you. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-profe… If this not addressing your question, please let me know. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 9:45 AM To: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>>, "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>, "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Brett, Thank you for following up. I will make sure to respond no later than the end of this week. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>> Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 11:38 AM To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>>, "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>, "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, Thanks for promising to get this information to me in Helsinki. Do you have an estimate for when it will be provided? Thanks, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: Schaefer, Brett Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:39 PM To: 'Xavier J. Calvez'; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Finance Staff Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, I appreciate the detailed breakdown on the legal fees That is indeed what I was looking for though I would think it useful to have the totals provided in the summary document. However, I did not see similar information for lobbying or education/ engagement/advice in the links provided. In fact, the only specific information that I saw listed is for Jamie Hedlund at $200,000. No information on other individual firms or vendors is listed at all – only the top line budget expenditure in the summary document link originally sent around. Could you provide that information? Thanks, Brett From: Xavier J. Calvez [mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:43 AM To: Schaefer, Brett; community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Finance Staff Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Dear all, It appears that the first link in my email further below (detail of legal fees by firm) does not resolve correctly. Please use the below instead. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal… Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 1:01 PM To: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>>, "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>, "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Dear Brett, Thank you for your interest and question. We currently publish the list of all vendors from whom ICANN obtain services in relation to the IANA Stewardship transition. The $$ value of the services received is aggregated by category of expenses, which you mention below (US Government affairs, Education/engagement/advice,…). This presentation is driven by 2 factors: providing clarity as to the type of services received, and abiding by the contractual obligation of confidentiality in force with each of the vendors (resulting from standard business sensitive information). We do publish however the detail of the legal advice, by firm and by working group, on this same page (see for example the link to the report of fees by firm: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal…)<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal…>. You will also find more information relative to ICANN’s lobbying in the following blog published a few months ago. In this blog, you will also find links to the disclosure reports that ICANN makes on lobbying activities. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/lobbying-disclosures-contributions-20…. Lastly, further information on lobbying appears in ICANN’s form 990 (Schedule C, Part II-B. On page 33/73 of the FY15 form 990 published at the following link): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/fy-2015-form-990-10may16-en.pdf I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have further questions. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org>> Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:54 PM To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>>, "community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>" <community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org<mailto:executive-team@icann.org>>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org<mailto:commsteam@icann.org>>, "icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>" <icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:finance-staff@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Xavier, Thank you. Could you please provide a more detailed breakdown of legal advice, US government affairs, and educations/engagement/advice? In each category, there are multiple firms/vendors listed (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-profe…) I would appreciate the amount provided to each individual vendor. If it is provided somewhere, I would appreciate you letting me know where to find it. Much appreciated, Brett ________________________________ Brett Schaefer Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6097 heritage.org<http://heritage.org/> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Xavier J. Calvez Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 12:10 AM To: community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org>; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>; CCWG-Accountability Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org<mailto:icann-board@icann.org>; Finance Staff Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update Dear all, You find at the link below the updated project’s expenses as of FY16 Q3 (from July 2014 to March 2016). As indicated a few months ago, we have added new detailed information on the staff support with the individual positions, names and percentages of effort over the period. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 <iana-stewardship-expenses-professional-vendor-01jun16-en.pdf> _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ community-finance mailing list community-finance(a)icann.org<mailto:community-finance@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/community-finance _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community -- ------------------------------------------------ "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured in an unjust state" -Confucius 邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也 ------------------------------------------------ Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar) Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3 email: Lanfran(a)Yorku.ca<mailto:Lanfran@Yorku.ca> Skype: slanfranco blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com<http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com/> Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

1 0

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update
by León Felipe Sánchez Ambía July 25, 2016

July 25, 2016

Dear Brett, I believe Xavier is on medical leave as he will be having surgery. I don't have more details but I'm sure Xavier will come back to is with answers as soon as he recovers. Best regards, León > El jul 25, 2016, a las 1:29 PM, Schaefer, Brett <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> escribió: > > Xavier, > > Are you planning to answer the questions raised in this thread? > > Thanks, > > Brett > > Brett Schaefer > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy > The Heritage Foundation > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE > Washington, DC 20002 > 202-608-6097 > heritage.org > From: Zakir Syed [mailto:zakirbinrehman@yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 4:07 PM > To: Marilyn Cade; Sam Lanfranco; Phil Corwin; Ken Stubbs; Paul Rosenzweig; Schaefer, Brett; 'Xavier J. Calvez' > Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; 'CCWG-Accountability'; icann-board(a)icann.org; 'Executive Team'; 'COMMS Team'; community-finance(a)icann.org; 'Finance Staff' > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > This is very useful discussion particularly on this very list. Any idea, how are the consultants/contractors hired by ICANN?. If this is through an RFP/competitive bid thn may be the RFP will have the detail/requirement what is required which in other words will mean what the consultants do. Not? > > Zakir > > > From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com> > To: Sam Lanfranco <sam(a)lanfranco.net>; Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>; Ken Stubbs <kstubbs(a)afilias.info>; Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com>; "'Schaefer, Brett'" <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org>; 'Xavier J. Calvez' <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Cc: "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>; 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org>; "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>; 'Executive Team' <executive-team(a)icann.org>; 'COMMS Team' <commsteam(a)icann.org>; "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>; 'Finance Staff' <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 2:27 AM > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > I'd like to stick to the topic we are discussing which is disclosure about 'advisors', and lobbyists, and not venture until the gTLDs contracts. I fear that would become a bog that is too unbounded, with some questioning the marketing plans of different gTLDs, like give aways, etc. > > So, I ask that as this is the CCWG-ACCT, and the topic is about the amounts paid for consultants specifically working on the IANA transition -- and who they are -- and that they have only ICANN as a client, not also members of ICANN's community on directly related subjects -- we stick to that discussion. > > All law firms in the US 'clear' conflicts before accepting a new client, and all corporations 'clear' their consultants. While this may be confidential in both these cases, I do agree that a public interest NGO, which is what ICANN is, can best serve itself, and the interest of the broader ICANN community by as much transparency as possible. BUT let's keep it high level and civil in our request for facts and figures. > > As I like to say: Facts are our friends. > > Of course, some issues have to be kept confidential. > > Who the consultants are has been published, what they were paid would add to the transparency. What they do, at a high level, should be published as well. I will say again that I think that the work is probably much needed. I spend a lot of time -- without being paid -- explaining ICANN as I do my other IG work and it is is a worthwhile task and an important one if we are to demystify ICANN to RoW [Rest of World]. > > I am sure it is all above board, but it has now taken on a sort of taint of 'why not tell'. > > Let's keep this high level and not make it a hunt for the details, but just get the high level facts, and make that a standard. > > Will help us all. > > M > > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [community-finance] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > To: psc(a)vlaw-dc.com; kstubbs(a)afilias.info; paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com; marilynscade(a)hotmail.com; brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org; xavier.calvez(a)icann.org > CC: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org; icann-board(a)icann.org; executive-team(a)icann.org; commsteam(a)icann.org; community-finance(a)icann.org; finance-staff(a)icann.org > From: sam(a)lanfranco.net > Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:23:12 -0400 > > As the non-lawyer economist here I would like to observe that the discussion has honed in on a specific enough question, one that has an ICANN definitive answer, and that it should be put both to the Board and the new CEO for a an answer and clarification. I previously worried that the ICANN DNS contract with .sucks seemed to verge on ICANN exposing itself to the RICO act in the U.S., given the .sucks marketing plan. Maybe I am overly cautious but as a not-for-profit corporation operating in the public interest ICANN is more than obliged to provide clarity here. Silence won't do. > > Sam Lanfranco, NPOC/CSIH > > > On 7/20/2016 12:06 PM, Phil Corwin wrote: > If the contract non-disclosure clause indeed violates IRS disclosure requirements then how could ICANN legal agree to it? > > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal > Virtualaw LLC > 1155 F Street, NW > Suite 1050 > Washington, DC 20004 > 202-559-8597/Direct > 202-559-8750/Fax > 202-255-6172/Cell > > Twitter: @VlawDC > > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey > > From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@afilias.info] > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 11:37 AM > To: Paul Rosenzweig; 'Marilyn Cade'; Phil Corwin; 'Schaefer, Brett'; 'Xavier J. Calvez' > Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; 'CCWG-Accountability'; icann-board(a)icann.org; 'Executive Team'; 'COMMS Team'; community-finance(a)icann.org; 'Finance Staff' > Subject: Re: [community-finance] [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > I believe Lori is correct here. IRS requirements on disclosures are > usually quite specific here > > Ken Stubbs > On 7/20/16 10:32, Lori Schulman wrote: > I don’t believe that 501©3 orgs can consider any consulting fees confidential as the top fees are required to be reported on the 990. > > Lori > > Lori S. Schulman > Senior Director, Internet Policy > International Trademark Association (INTA) > +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman > > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 10:16 AM > To: 'Marilyn Cade' <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com>; 'Phil Corwin' <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>; 'Schaefer, Brett' <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org>; 'Xavier J. Calvez' <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org>; icann-board(a)icann.org; 'Executive Team' <executive-team(a)icann.org>; 'COMMS Team' <commsteam(a)icann.org>; community-finance(a)icann.org; 'Finance Staff' <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > I agree completely with Marilyn and Phil. I have been on both sides of non-disclosure agreements – both ones requested by me and ones requested by my clients. Typically, a client (in the position of ICANN) may request that a consultant sign an NDA so as to protect the confidentiality of its efforts or its intellectual property. Sometimes a consultant might have a proprietary methodology or process that they are using on behalf of the client that they wish to protect. > > Neither circumstance applies here that I can see. And in no case that I am aware of has a client ever asked me to keep confidential my fee … I don’t broadcast them, but I’m in the private sector. For ICANN, which is an NGO acting in the global public interest, I cannot see any reason at all why ICANN would want or agree to a confidentiality arrangement as to the size of the fee paid. > > Xavier – can you tell us what the rationale is? I may be missing something ….. > > Thanks > Paul > > Paul Rosenzweig > paul.rosenzweig(a)redbranchconsulting.com > O: +1 (202) 547-0660 > M: +1 (202) 329-9650 > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 > www.redbranchconsulting.com > My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ > > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 9:05 AM > To: Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com>; Schaefer, Brett <brett.schaefer(a)heritage.org>; Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org>; icann-board(a)icann.org; Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>; COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>; community-finance(a)icann.org; Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > I support Phil's clarifying explanation. > > I also think that anyone who is in this category, should have to declare if they re also representing companies in a SO/AC. > > Or advising governments. > > In the BC, we do not allow an ICANN consultant to be a BC member, regardless of the amount, but if someone is a backdoor advisor to ICANN and also a group of entities, in a SO/AC, that would not be so obvious, but I think that for integrity sake, of course, any such entity would recuse themselves from advising companies, while also advising ICANN. > > And I would expect ICANN to disqualify such entities as their consultants. > > Thanks, Phil, for this useful clarification. > > M > > > From: psc(a)vlaw-dc.com > To: Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org; xavier.calvez(a)icann.org > Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:48:08 +0000 > CC: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org; icann-board(a)icann.org; executive-team(a)icann.org; commsteam(a)icann.org; community-finance(a)icann.org; finance-staff(a)icann.org > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > In the U.S. much of what used to be done by registered lobbyists is now performed by “strategic advisors” who walk right up to the line of what constitutes lobbying (and maybe a few inches over), and nonetheless facilitate door opening to key members of Congress and the Executive branch, and who “educate” rather than “lobby” members of both branches of government. So while the seven firms may not be engaged in what is considered lobbying under current U.S. law, they are still likely engaged in helping to assure officials outcomes desired by ICANN corporate. > > It is for that reason – as well as for the exercise of effective oversight over ICANN budgeting and expenditures – that the community should have more data on this. If ICANN is prohibited by its contracts with these firms from disclosing its expenditures that is unfortunate – and in the future I would hope that ICANN would tell any firms being considered for such duties that its own transparency obligations to the community preclude it from agreeing to such restrictions (I’d wager that the majority of the firms would waive confidentiality rather than lose the contract). > > At a minimum, ICANN should disclose the aggregate amounts spent with these seven firms since they were engaged – surely their contracts don’t bar such aggregate reporting. > > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal > Virtualaw LLC > 1155 F Street, NW > Suite 1050 > Washington, DC 20004 > 202-559-8597/Direct > 202-559-8750/Fax > 202-255-6172/Cell > > Twitter: @VlawDC > > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey > > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Schaefer, Brett > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 1:04 PM > To: Xavier J. Calvez > Cc: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability; icann-board(a)icann.org; Executive Team; COMMS Team; community-finance(a)icann.org; Finance Staff > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Xavier, > > Are you saying that ICANN’s contracts for Education/Engagement/Advice with (1) Albright Stonebridge Group LLC, (2) Edelman, (3) Interface Media, (4) Rice Hadley Gates LLC, (5) Summit Strategies International LLC, (6) WBC Global, and (7) Wiley Rein LLP each contain confidentiality provisions that prohibit ICANN from disclosing the specific amount paid to each of these individual vendors? > > Does this only apply to the CCWG and the public or does it also apply to other parts of the ICANN community, specifically the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees? > > Thank you for the link on lobbying disclosures. For those who are interested, here are ICANN’s lobbying expenditures based on the disclosure website of the U.S. Congress. > > <image001.png> > > I do have a couple of additional questions. Would this source capture lobbying exclusively directed toward the US Executive Branch? Has ICANN spent any funds during this period lobbying governments other than the US? > > Thank you, > > Brett > > Brett Schaefer > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy > The Heritage Foundation > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE > Washington, DC 20002 > 202-608-6097 > heritage.org > From: Xavier J. Calvez [mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org] > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 6:30 PM > To: Schaefer, Brett > Cc: community-finance(a)icann.org; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability; Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org; Finance Staff > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Brett, > Yes, the information I provided in my latest email had been included in some previous communication. I just wanted to make sure you had a clear visibility on this information, which provides for (i) categories of expenses, (ii) the individual names of the vendors grouped for each category, and (iii) the total value of the expenses for each category. > With respect to the contractual obligations of confidentiality in commercial contracts, ICANN is subject to them, like all business organizations. That said, we disclose what we can consistent with standard business confidentiality provisions in vendor contracts. We cannot disclose the specific amount of spend with each vendor but we were able to disclose the names of the service providers engaged. > Regarding the lobbying expenses, as you are aware, both organizations that hire lobbyists and firms that lobby on behalf of organizations are required under U.S. federal law to file lobbying disclosure reports. In addition to ICANN’s quarterly lobbying disclosures posted on our website, you can find the amounts ICANN has paid to individual outside lobbying firms at http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx. > I hope this helps and clarifies. > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> > Date: Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 7:07 AM > To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Cc: "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org>, Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Xavier, > > This is pretty much the same information that was provided before. I am asking for a breakdown of how much was paid to each vender in the lobbying category (Akin Gump, etc.) and the education/engagement/advice category (Albright Stoneridge, etc.). > > Thank you, > > Brett > > On Jul 13, 2016, at 8:13 PM, Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> wrote: > Dear Brett, > In response to your question listed below on 22 June: the detailed information provided on Other professional fees (other than legal fees, detailed in a separate section of the “Transition project cost” expense webpage, on the IANA Stewardship Transition webpage) can be found in the section called “Professional Services – Expenses Breakdown”. Within this section, you will find a link to a document that provides the list of Professional Services (other than legal fees) incurred, by category, with the names of the vendors, and the total amount of expenditures for the category. > > This link is copied below and was provided in my first answer to your question. I have also attached the file to which this link refers in case the link would not work for you. > > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-profe… > > If this not addressing your question, please let me know. > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > Brett Schaefer > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy > The Heritage Foundation > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE > Washington, DC 20002 > 202-608-6097 > heritage.org > From: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 9:45 AM > To: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Brett, > Thank you for following up. > I will make sure to respond no later than the end of this week. > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> > Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 at 11:38 AM > To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Xavier, > > Thanks for promising to get this information to me in Helsinki. Do you have an estimate for when it will be provided? > > Thanks, > > Brett > > Brett Schaefer > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy > The Heritage Foundation > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE > Washington, DC 20002 > 202-608-6097 > heritage.org > From: Schaefer, Brett > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:39 PM > To: 'Xavier J. Calvez'; community-finance(a)icann.org; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability > Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org; Finance Staff > Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Xavier, > > I appreciate the detailed breakdown on the legal fees That is indeed what I was looking for though I would think it useful to have the totals provided in the summary document. > > However, I did not see similar information for lobbying or education/ engagement/advice in the links provided. In fact, the only specific information that I saw listed is for Jamie Hedlund at $200,000. No information on other individual firms or vendors is listed at all – only the top line budget expenditure in the summary document link originally sent around. > > Could you provide that information? > > Thanks, > > Brett > > From: Xavier J. Calvez [mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org] > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:43 AM > To: Schaefer, Brett; community-finance(a)icann.org; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability > Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org; Finance Staff > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Dear all, > It appears that the first link in my email further below (detail of legal fees by firm) does not resolve correctly. Please use the below instead. > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal… > > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > From: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 1:01 PM > To: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Dear Brett, > Thank you for your interest and question. > We currently publish the list of all vendors from whom ICANN obtain services in relation to the IANA Stewardship transition. The $$ value of the services received is aggregated by category of expenses, which you mention below (US Government affairs, Education/engagement/advice,…). This presentation is driven by 2 factors: providing clarity as to the type of services received, and abiding by the contractual obligation of confidentiality in force with each of the vendors (resulting from standard business sensitive information). > We do publish however the detail of the legal advice, by firm and by working group, on this same page (see for example the link to the report of fees by firm: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-legal…) > You will also find more information relative to ICANN’s lobbying in the following blog published a few months ago. In this blog, you will also find links to the disclosure reports that ICANN makes on lobbying activities. > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/lobbying-disclosures-contributions-20…. > Lastly, further information on lobbying appears in ICANN’s form 990 (Schedule C, Part II-B. On page 33/73 of the FY15 form 990 published at the following link): > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/fy-2015-form-990-10may16-en.pdf > I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have further questions. > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > > From: "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer(a)heritage.org> > Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:54 PM > To: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org>, "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, "cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org>, CCWG-Accountability <accountability-cross-community(a)icann.org> > Cc: Executive Team <executive-team(a)icann.org>, COMMS Team <commsteam(a)icann.org>, "icann-board(a)icann.org" <icann-board(a)icann.org>, Finance Staff <finance-staff(a)icann.org> > Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Xavier, > > Thank you. Could you please provide a more detailed breakdown of legal advice, US government affairs, and educations/engagement/advice? In each category, there are multiple firms/vendors listed (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-expenses-profe…) I would appreciate the amount provided to each individual vendor. If it is provided somewhere, I would appreciate you letting me know where to find it. > > Much appreciated, > > Brett > > Brett Schaefer > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy > The Heritage Foundation > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE > Washington, DC 20002 > 202-608-6097 > heritage.org > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Xavier J. Calvez > Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2016 12:10 AM > To: community-finance(a)icann.org; cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org; CCWG-Accountability > Cc: Executive Team; COMMS Team; icann-board(a)icann.org; Finance Staff > Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] IANA Stewardship Transition - Project Expenses - FY16 Q3 update > > Dear all, > You find at the link below the updated project’s expenses as of FY16 Q3 (from July 2014 to March 2016). As indicated a few months ago, we have added new detailed information on the staff support with the individual positions, names and percentages of effort over the period. > > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs > > > Thank you. > > Best, > Xavier > > Xavier Calvez > ICANN > CFO > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > Office : +1 (310) 301 5838 > Mobile : +1 (805) 312 0052 > Fax : +1 (310) 957-2348 > > <iana-stewardship-expenses-professional-vendor-01jun16-en.pdf> > > _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > > > _______________________________________________ > community-finance mailing list > community-finance(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/community-finance > > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > -- > ------------------------------------------------ > "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured > in an unjust state" -Confucius > 邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也 > ------------------------------------------------ > Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar) > Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3 > email: Lanfran(a)Yorku.ca Skype: slanfranco > blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com > Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852 > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

1 0

Re: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: Draft Provisions for PTI Bylaws/Contract-Annex C (Sections 7 and 8)
by Martin Boyle July 25, 2016

July 25, 2016

Hi Yuko, hi all, Unfortunately I am unlikely to be able to join Thursday's call given a long-established prior commitment. I have a serious issue with 2 on page 1. The footnote refers to 3.8.2 (isn't this C.8.2?) which is all about policies and procedures developed by the relevant entities. The wording as it stands changes the "relevant entities" to cc & gTLDs. C.8.2 specifically relates to the policies and processes and the performance of the IANA functions. I would see this much more to do with changes to the architectural and operational process environments - those things for which RZERC is being established. The first item covers policy on decision-making on IANA-related changes. 2. introduces a new criterion. Incidentally, I would also note that C.8.2 doesn't figure in Annex E of the CWG proposal. As it stands, 2. leaves the PTI exposed to a registry refusing to agree to a change. For example, in the case of a gTLD, a registry that has lost its contract with ICANN because it failed to adhere to agreed GNSO policy would be able to block a change of registry. I am more concerned with the ccTLD situation. 2. appears to give the PTI authority to make material changes in the policies and procedures developed by any ccTLD registry ... with the express written consent of the impacted registry, no matter what the legal circumstances. A local decision to revoke a delegation that has force of law behind it and has been through due legal process might be blocked by the incumbent, but the PTI ends up as the man in the middle that has to make the decision. That is potentially a risk for the PTI and could lead to a contradiction to Annex C 7.ii , to adhere to laws/processes, where a registry could block PTI's ability to follow national due process. For me I am concerned about this subversion of the national (and in some cases there is a jurisdiction issue, so that might read "appropriate" national jurisdiction) process leading back to final recourse being in California, not nationally. In addition the wording suggests that PTI could decide not to make requested changes even those that are requested by the registry. Again no reference to the policy framework relevant for the registry concerned. In summary as it stands I have serious concerns with the inclusion of 2. on page 1. It does not seem to meet the requirements of Annex C and was not included in Annex E. In addition the clause from the NTIA contract seems to have been modified so that it refers to national policy (which separately in the NTIA contract is excluded from the scope of the IANA functions operator's role). On these grounds I have problems with the inclusion of this clause as drafted. Thanks Martin -----Original Message----- From: cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Yuko Green Sent: 20 July 2016 19:08 To: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: Draft Provisions for PTI Bylaws/Contract-Annex C (Sections 7 and 8) Dear all, Per our last CWG meeting from 19 July, I am re-circulating the Annex C table for your review. Regards, Yuko Green -----Original Message----- From: cwg-stewardship-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Lise Fuhr Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 9:40 AM To: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Provisions for PTI Bylaws/Contract-Annex C (Sections 7 and 8) Dear CWG, As you might recall we have earlier discussed how to ensure that Annex C section 7 and 8, from the CWG Proposal, could be ensured in the PTI Bylaws and Contract. Sidley has sent the attached draft which we will cover at the next CWG call as part of the Client Committee update. Best, Jonathan and Lise

1 0

RZERC member qualification criteria
by Yuko Green July 22, 2016

July 22, 2016

Dear all, As per this morning's CWG-IANA meeting # 84, I am circulating the RZERC member qualification criteria that was agreed within the IOTF mail list for your review: * The RZERC is the group that will be reviewing issues relating to the architecture and operational systems for the DNS Root Zone as it evolves, and providing recommendations to the ICANN Board to ensure the security, stability, and resiliency of the root zone. * Appointees to the RZERC must have a strong overall understanding of the Root Zone, and must be able to fully represent their appointing organization's particular interest in the root zone. * Able to work and communicate in written and spoken English * Effective communication skills Please let us know if you have any comments or feedback. Regards, Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: yuko.green(a)icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

6 6