And I thought that we just a week ago decided not to work on that model for now. From: Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org<mailto:mshears@cdt.org>> Date: Thursday 9 April 2015 22:04 To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>, Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu<mailto:mueller@syr.edu>> Cc: "cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>" <cwg-stewardship@icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Remember to send questions and comments to legal advice from Sidley Austin I also think this is what Paul was suggesting. On 4/9/2015 7:37 PM, Greg Shatan wrote: I second what Milton is saying. I think Paul is proposing essentially an inversion of the Sidley Austin model (and by extension the "Integrated Hybrid Model" or the "Internal Model with Structural Separation"). As I read Paul's suggestion, instead of having the affiliate be the "Post-Transition IANA" (i.e., the IANA Functions operations "in a box"), the affiliate would be the "Post-Transition Oversight/Accountability Mechanism" ("PTOAM"?). Presumably, this would keep the IANA Functions operations inside of ICANN as a (functionally separated) unit. The PTOAM would then be much like Contract Co. (although [possibly] "affiliated" with ICANN rather than completely independent). 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<mailto:gsshatan@lawabel.com> ICANN-related: gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> www.lawabel.com<http://www.lawabel.com/> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller@syr.edu<mailto:mueller@syr.edu>> wrote:
-----Original Message----- On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 10:58:30PM +0100, Paul M Kane - CWG wrote:
I would like to specifically ask Sidley to give formal advise on how best to ensure an affiliate company (as part of ICANN Community) can be the custodian for the Stewardship role currently undertaken by NTIA.
I thought in the Sidley documents, ICANN was taking the Stewardship role currently held by NTIA, and PTI does the IANA part, at least if there's an affiliate company. Did I misunderstand?
You did not misunderstand the Sidley-Austin discussion draft. You are, I think, misunderstanding Paul Kane. Paul seems to be asking that the Affiliate be more like the Contract Co. _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship -- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 (0)771 247 2987