Dear All,

I want to take this opportunity to share a few thoughts on our ongoing discussions.  I agree that we cannot and should not continue to discuss early engagement in the abstract only.  In addition, I agree that there is room for the GNSO to take on a more proactive role in early engagement of the GAC.  A clearly defined set of triggers on the GNSO side is certainly a possibility.  While it is true that the GNSO would not want to decide for the GAC in all cases whether an issue is deserving of the GAC’s attention, there will most certainly be instances where the GNSO might know upfront that GAC input would be necessary, such as issues on which the GAC has provided advice in the past and issues that unambiguously relate to treaties or national laws.

By way of example, discussion arose during the November 13, 2014 GNSO Council meeting concerning the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP Working Group Letter sent to Mason as GNSO Liaison to GAC.  In the letter, the WG is proactively seeking Mason’s assistance in engaging the GAC on certain issues raised by the GAC’s Los Angeles Communiqué, namely, discrepancies between the GAC advice and the directives contained in the Working Group Charter.  As I understand it, Mason is awaiting further instruction on how to proceed.  This seems to me to be a great opportunity to refine and test the mechanisms we have been discussing for engagement and collaboration between the GAC and GNSO.

In addition, there is one item that we did not discuss during the call this week but that I believe we should revisit – a GAC point person to serve as Mason’s counterpart for day-to-day coordination.  I may know one or two people who may be interested. 

In terms of planning for Singapore, I think it would be beneficial to have a face-to-face meeting of this group, perhaps in an informal setting over lunch.  We can invite other members of our constituent groups along in an effort to generate greater support for the work of the CG.  In a smaller, interactive setting, we may be able pinpoint more precisely the type and amount of information necessary for effective collaboration.  I would be happy to reach out to Glen offline to determine the feasibility of planning the lunch.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.  I welcome your feedback on the above items.

Best regards,

Brian

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.orgOn Behalf OfTerri Agnew
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 5:34:26 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
To: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org
Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org
Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC