FW: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
All, Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley. We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg. Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this. For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below. Thank-you Lise & Jonathan -- I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1. From: <cwg-client-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > Date: Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 To: Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> > Cc: "cwg-client@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client@icann.org> " <cwg-client@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined. Alternatives may be: 1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous). 2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion. 3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out. Greg From: Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] Sent: 16 April 2016 02:29 To: Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> Subject: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal Dear All, There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.” We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated. Thanks, Sharon SHARON R. FLANAGAN SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> <http://www.sidley.com> www.sidley.com <http://www2.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SIDLEY_150-AUTOSIG.png> **************************************************************************************************** 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. ****************************************************************************************************
Hello Jonathan/all, I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..." It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws. Regards On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley.
We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg.
Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this.
For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below.
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
--
I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1.
*From: *<cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 *To: *Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com> *Cc: *"cwg-client@icann.org" <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined.
Alternatives may be:
1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous).
2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion.
3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out.
Greg
*From:* Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] *Sent:* 16 April 2016 02:29 *To:* Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject:* [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Dear All,
There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.”
We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.
Thanks,
Sharon
*SHARON R. FLANAGAN*
*SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP* 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com www.sidley.com
*[image: 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.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Dear Co-Chairs, In the absence of any justification/clarification provided from Greg in relation to my argument. Then i like to formerly note my disagreement with what Greg suggested and maintain that "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" is more appropriate; we cannot afford to be introducing unnecessary ambiguities in the bylaw. Regards On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Jonathan/all,
I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..."
It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info
wrote:
All,
Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley.
We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg.
Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this.
For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below.
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
--
I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1.
*From: *<cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 *To: *Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com> *Cc: *"cwg-client@icann.org" <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined.
Alternatives may be:
1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous).
2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion.
3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out.
Greg
*From:* Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] *Sent:* 16 April 2016 02:29 *To:* Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject:* [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Dear All,
There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.”
We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.
Thanks,
Sharon
*SHARON R. FLANAGAN*
*SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP* 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com www.sidley.com
*[image: 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.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Seun, I don't understand your argument. Can you clarify what you are arguing and what result you are proposing. If you are proposing removing the reference to the Articles of Incorporation (which define ICANN's "purpose"), please explain why that should be changed from the CWG's final report. Thanks! Greg On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,
In the absence of any justification/clarification provided from Greg in relation to my argument. Then i like to formerly note my disagreement with what Greg suggested and maintain that "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" is more appropriate; we cannot afford to be introducing unnecessary ambiguities in the bylaw.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Jonathan/all,
I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..."
It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson < jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley.
We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg.
Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this.
For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below.
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
--
I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1.
*From: *<cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 *To: *Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com> *Cc: *"cwg-client@icann.org" <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined.
Alternatives may be:
1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous).
2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion.
3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out.
Greg
*From:* Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] *Sent:* 16 April 2016 02:29 *To:* Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject:* [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Dear All,
There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.”
We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.
Thanks,
Sharon
*SHARON R. FLANAGAN*
*SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP* 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com www.sidley.com
*[image: 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.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
Hello Greg, I am not proposing removal of that AOI i am saying if "purpose and role" is not defined/clear then we should remove it. However based on your response (re: purpose) which i hope is a legal fact about where purpose is defined(i am not a lawyer so won't doubt on that), I will then say having it read as *"purpose and mission set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws"* will be more appropriate which is still different from your option 1. Regards On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Seun,
I don't understand your argument. Can you clarify what you are arguing and what result you are proposing. If you are proposing removing the reference to the Articles of Incorporation (which define ICANN's "purpose"), please explain why that should be changed from the CWG's final report.
Thanks!
Greg
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,
In the absence of any justification/clarification provided from Greg in relation to my argument. Then i like to formerly note my disagreement with what Greg suggested and maintain that "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" is more appropriate; we cannot afford to be introducing unnecessary ambiguities in the bylaw.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Jonathan/all,
I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..."
It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson < jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley.
We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg.
Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this.
For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below.
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
--
I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1.
*From: *<cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 *To: *Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com> *Cc: *"cwg-client@icann.org" <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined.
Alternatives may be:
1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous).
2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion.
3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out.
Greg
*From:* Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] *Sent:* 16 April 2016 02:29 *To:* Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject:* [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Dear All,
There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.”
We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.
Thanks,
Sharon
*SHARON R. FLANAGAN*
*SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP* 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com www.sidley.com
*[image: 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.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Just a minor follow-up, as i said i am not suggesting removing AoI in the text but at the same time i will not be opposed to it either. IMO as far as CWG is concerned, i think bylaw is the most critical implementation document of our proposal(especially in budget context). That said, considering the subject of discussion is about ICANN budget i will tend to say it has some form of dependency on the CCWG and i do expect/hope that the final wording will be cross-checked with them as well. Ofcourse i am not expecting any surprises. ;-) Cheers! On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Greg,
I am not proposing removal of that AOI i am saying if "purpose and role" is not defined/clear then we should remove it. However based on your response (re: purpose) which i hope is a legal fact about where purpose is defined(i am not a lawyer so won't doubt on that), I will then say having it read as *"purpose and mission set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws"* will be more appropriate which is still different from your option 1.
Regards
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Seun,
I don't understand your argument. Can you clarify what you are arguing and what result you are proposing. If you are proposing removing the reference to the Articles of Incorporation (which define ICANN's "purpose"), please explain why that should be changed from the CWG's final report.
Thanks!
Greg
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,
In the absence of any justification/clarification provided from Greg in relation to my argument. Then i like to formerly note my disagreement with what Greg suggested and maintain that "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" is more appropriate; we cannot afford to be introducing unnecessary ambiguities in the bylaw.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Jonathan/all,
I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..."
It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws.
Regards
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson < jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley.
We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg.
Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this.
For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below.
Thank-you
Lise & Jonathan
--
I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1.
*From: *<cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan < gregshatanipc@gmail.com> *Date: *Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 *To: *Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com> *Cc: *"cwg-client@icann.org" <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined.
Alternatives may be:
1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous).
2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion.
3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out.
Greg
*From:* Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com] *Sent:* 16 April 2016 02:29 *To:* Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org> *Subject:* [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal
Dear All,
There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.”
We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.
Thanks,
Sharon
*SHARON R. FLANAGAN*
*SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP* 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 sflanagan@sidley.com www.sidley.com
*[image: 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.
****************************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>*
Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
Dear Seun & CWG colleagues, Lise and I have discussed this and we will follow with Sidley via the Client Committee to be sure where this has settled. In particular, did Sharon’s question (see immediately below) get answered / resolved. “We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated.” Thank-you, Lise & Jonathan From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: 19 April 2016 15:21 To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> Cc: cwg-stewardship@icann.org Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal Dear Co-Chairs, In the absence of any justification/clarification provided from Greg in relation to my argument. Then i like to formerly note my disagreement with what Greg suggested and maintain that "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" is more appropriate; we cannot afford to be introducing unnecessary ambiguities in the bylaw. Regards On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com <mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> > wrote: Hello Jonathan/all, I actually think what is proposed by the lawyers is somewhat neater and straightforward, will be good to know specifically why Greg thinks the intent/scope of that section could exceed "Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws" hence should be covered by "purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws..." It may be good to know what defines ICANN purpose and role aside those included in the Articles and Bylaws. Regards On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info <mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info> > wrote: All, Please see below from the Sharon @ Sidley. We have discussed this on the client committee and our view is that the highlighted wording is adequate i.e. use the option 1 provided by Greg. Please let us know if you disagree, mindful that time is tight on all of this. For ease of use, I have copied the client committee dialogue below. Thank-you Lise & Jonathan -- I tend to agree with Greg that as the sentence ends with ‘or other matters of concern to the community’ it is not an issue to use the text as is in the proposal including ‘ purpose’ and ‘role’ although these are not (formally) defined. I therefore support his alternative 1. From: <cwg-client-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > Date: Saturday 16 April 2016 at 18:33 To: Sharon Flanagan <sflanagan@sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> > Cc: "cwg-client@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client@icann.org> " <cwg-client@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal Since this is an open ended list (ending with "or other matters of concern to the community."), i don't think there's a big issue with including "purpose" and "role". However, I do think these terms are different in nature from the defined Mission, and from each other. Purpose can be traced back to, and is essentially defined in Article 2 of the ICANN Articles of Incorporation; as such, it is similar to Mission in specificity. Role on the other hand is completely ambiguous and undefined. Alternatives may be: 1. Leave as is -- ambiguity and all (but to my mind only "role" is ambiguous). 2. Move role elsewhere in the list, without reference to the Articles and Bylaws -- however, this makes it even more ambiguous (as currently drafted, it's at least clear that the "role" needs to be derived from the Articles and Bylaws in some fashion. 3. Eliminate "role" entirely -- but we then run the risk of losing a point that was being made by the CWG, since Role has a different connotation than Mission or Purpose, and has more to do with how the Mission and Purpose are carried out. Greg From: Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> ] Sent: 16 April 2016 02:29 To: Client Committee <cwg-client@icann.org <mailto:cwg-client@icann.org> > Subject: [client com] Input requested regarding Paragraph 106 of CWG Proposal Dear All, There is language in the CWG proposal at paragraph 106 regarding budget approvals that refers to: “The community may reject the ICANN Budget based on perceived inconsistency with the purpose, mission and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN stakeholders, financial stability or other matters of concern to the community.” We’re requesting confirmation that the Mission of ICANN as set forth in the Bylaws is synonymous with the “purpose, mission and role” of ICANN as set forth in ICANN’s Articles and Bylaws for purposes of the CWG proposal. The concern is that “purpose” and “role” are otherwise ambiguous and not defined, whereas the Mission is carefully articulated. Thanks, Sharon SHARON R. FLANAGAN SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 415 772 1271 <tel:%2B1%20415%20772%201271> sflanagan@sidley.com <mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com> <http://www.sidley.com> www.sidley.com <http://www2.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SIDLEY_150-AUTOSIG.png> **************************************************************************************************** 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. **************************************************************************************************** _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 alt email: <http://goog_1872880453> seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 alt email: <http://goog_1872880453> seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
participants (3)
-
Greg Shatan -
Jonathan Robinson -
Seun Ojedeji