Ah that explains the confusion. The last question refers only to the questions asked about the role of ICANN's legal department in this process, asked five days ago and still awaiting a response. The other 13 questions should be easy to answer in short order. I would hope that the closed committee recognises the importance of providing updates on its process as it progresses rather than say nothing until it has reached a final decision. Kieren - [sent through phone] On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
No, Kieren. That's the answer to the last question. On Monday, March 2, 2015, Kieren McCarthy <kieren@kierenmccarthy.com> wrote:
I'm assuming that's the answer to the first question. If so, thank you.
There are, I believe, 13 more.
Kieren
On Monday, March 2, 2015, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Yes.
Greg
On Monday, March 2, 2015, Kieren McCarthy <kieren@kierenmccarthy.com> wrote:
Just to follow up on this from a week ago.
As noted before, we will ask the firms' permission to reveal their identities at this stage and for permission to circulate their submissions.
Has this happened? Have you asked the firms? Have they responded? How was the question phrased? If they do not respond, will you publish the names regardless?
The Client Committee has now scheduled conference calls with each of the three "short list" firms. These meetings are scheduled for Thursday, February 26, Friday, February 27, and Monday, March 2. The calls are expected to last 60-90 minutes.
We will also make clear to them that, if chosen, the representation should be designed to meet transparency and accountability standards beyond those typically encountered in the attorney-client relationship (which tend to value confidentiality and the maintenance of the attorney-client privilege)
I note that all three meetings have now occurred.
Was this clarification over openness made clear to each firm? How was that done? Did any of the firms express reservations? What was the agreed resolution?
I expect that we will schedule a call for as soon as possible after the 3 meetings take place to discuss and compare the firms and move forward toward engaging one of the firms on our behalf.
When will this call be? Will you be making that call public? Will you be providing minutes of the meetings so far? When do you expect this to be resolved and a decision made?
I also note that there were a number of questions from John Poole a number of days ago that have so far gone unanswered, including several about the role that ICANN's legal team is taking in the selection of an independent law firm that is due to review ICANN's own legal position.
Can you confirm that you will answer these questions in due course?
Thanks
Kieren
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
As soon as we can, you will.
Greg
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
Thanks for this helpful update. Look forward to learning the names of the firms being considered.
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
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 25, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
All:
The Client Committee has now scheduled conference calls with each of the three "short list" firms. These meetings are scheduled for Thursday, February 26, Friday, February 27, and Monday, March 2. The calls are expected to last 60-90 minutes.
In addition to the Client Committee, Leon Sanchez, a member of the CCWG legal committee, will be sitting in on most, if not all, of the calls. Samantha Eisner, a member of the ICANN legal staff, will also be on the calls.
Each of the firms have seen the legal scoping document and the Singapore discussion document, and provided a link to the CWG's wiki page They were also informed of today's US Senate hearing beforehand.
As noted before, we will ask the firms' permission to reveal their identities at this stage and for permission to circulate their submissions. We will also make clear to them that, if chosen, the representation should be designed to meet transparency and accountability standards beyond those typically encountered in the attorney-client relationship (which tend to value confidentiality and the maintenance of the attorney-client privilege)
I expect that we will schedule a call for as soon as possible after the 3 meetings take place to discuss and compare the firms and move forward toward engaging one of the firms on our behalf. We may also have further prep/debrief calls around the conferences.
In a addition, we are in the process of preparing documents to memorialize our initial selection criteria/process, so that it can be better understood. We will keep you informed of the process as it progresses. If there are any specific subjects you would like me to try to cover, please let me know.
Greg
--
*Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
*Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*
*666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*
*Direct* 212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
*Fax* 212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
*gsshatan@lawabel.com*
*ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com*
*www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>* ------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5646 / Virus Database: 4299/9172 - Release Date: 02/24/15
<ATT00001.c>
--
*Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
*Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*
*666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*
*Direct* 212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
*Fax* 212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
*gsshatan@lawabel.com*
*ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com*
*www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
--
*Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*
*Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*
*666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*
*Direct* 212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022
*Fax* 212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428
*gsshatan@lawabel.com*
*ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com*
*www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
-- *Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab* *Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet* *666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621* *Direct* 212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022 *Fax* 212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428 *gsshatan@lawabel.com <gsshatan@lawabel.com>* *ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>* *www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*