Thanks Ana, Suzanne & Mark for your responses ..
I hope the agenda circulated earlier addresses both sides of the
discussion:
-
With respect to new
PDPs, GAC early input and the handling of multiple PDPs running simultaneously
-
With
respect to ongoing PDPs, more effective and timely engagement with GNSO colleagues
to resolve current issues
Looking forward to discussing this on our upcoming calls .. Yet I
would like to remind ourselves that we will not be getting into the details of specific
issues but rather how to facilitate discussion of those specific issues, in
light of the existence of this consultation group, the GNSO Liaison, the GAC
counterpart, both leaderships and support staff, and through any existing or new
mechanisms as suggested by the group ..
Kind Regards
--Manal
From: Suzanne Radell
[mailto:SRadell@ntia.doc.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 5:17 PM
To: CARVELL, Mark
Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org; gnso-secs@icann.org; Manal Ismail; Mason
Cole; Brian Winterfeldt
Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation
Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
As far as I know, the PDP WG has drafted a proposed letter to the
GAC that is expected to be approved by the GNSO Council. I defer to Mason
as to the status of the letter. Once it is approved and sent, I expect we
will have a much clearer idea of what questions this PDP WG has for the
GAC. Cheers, Suz
Suzanne Murray Radell
Senior Policy Advisor
NTIA/Office of
International Affairs
PH: 202-482-3167
FX: 202-482-1865
From: CARVELL, Mark [Mark.Carvell@Culture.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 6:49 AM
To: Suzanne Radell
Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org; gnso-secs@icann.org; Manal Ismail; Mason
Cole; Brian Winterfeldt
Subject: RE: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation
Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
Dear Suz
Many thanks and I agree on all points: we should be
transitioning now to more effective and timely engagement with GNSO colleagues
on resolving problems occurring in current PDPs that directly concern the GAC
members and observers.
Is there a summary available of the UDRP/URS process questions
for IGOs and INGOs that can be circulated to the GAC in order to get us up to
speed on this?
Best regards
Mark
Mark Carvell
United Kingdom Representative on the GAC
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Suzanne Radell
Sent: 25 November 2014 20:11
To: Manal Ismail; Mason Cole; Brian Winterfeldt
Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org; gnso-secs@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Groupteleconference
Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
Hi all, I wanted to weigh in briefly on this exchange to both
volunteer to serve as a contact on the GAC side for Mason (happy to be a part
of a larger GAC-GNSO working group, should a decision be taken to create such a
group), and to support the use of the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection
Mechanisms PDP as an initial test case. I do agree that using this
particular PDP would not address the “early engagement” aspect of
our work, but having read the transcripts from the two most recent meetings of
this particular PDP WG, I do think there are some areas identified in their
work that we can easily/constructively clarify through our new
mechanisms.
The transcripts reinforce the value of having Mason serve as the
GNSO liaison to the GAC, as this particular group is raising/has raised issues
and questions that Mason’s new role can provide assistance with. To
cite just one example, questions were raised by members of the PDP WG on both
the November 13 and November 19 calls as to which IGOs they should be reaching
out to. If we had alerted Mason to the GAC’s approach (e.g. GAC
Chair, me and the IGO coalition) to resolving the outstanding issues we
identified in LA, then Mason would have been able to update the PDP WG on the
19th. I have also noted that this PDP WG is looking into the
issue of legal immunity for IGOs, with some discussion of how individual
governments address the matter nationally. This seems to me to be an
issue where direct exchanges would be helpful to their work.
Finally, it does seem as if we’re all leaning toward an
informal lunch get together in Singapore, so that’s good to know for
planning purposes. We might also want to consider inviting some members
of the IGO-INGO PDP WG to join, as we could possibly clear the air on some
outstanding issues.
Best regards to all, Suz
Suzanne Murray Radell
Senior Policy Advisor, NTIA/OIA
202-482-3167
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Manal Ismail
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 4:35 AM
To: Mason Cole; Brian Winterfeldt
Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org; gnso-secs@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation
Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
Many thanks Brian and Mason for sharing your thoughts ..
I fully agree with Brian that we should not continue discussing
early engagement in the abstract only and fully agree that the IGO-INGO
Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP may be a good case to test engagement
and collaboration between the GAC and GNSO .. But I also note that this will
not be testing neither EARLY engagement nor the handling of simultaneous PDPs
in terms of prioritization and streamlining .. However, we can still do and
benefit from both:
-
Use the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP as a
test case for GAC-GNSO collaboration, where views of both constituencies are
different
-
Agree on a mechanism (quick-look, Triage committee, …etc)
that would change the pattern of GAC engagement, maximizing it at the earliest
stages
I can see an important and different role for Mason to play in
both .. It's also good to know that you agree that there may be instances where
the GNSO might know upfront that GAC input would be necessary ..
I do apologize for the delay in coming back with the name of a
counterpart for Mason from the GAC side .. As mentioned earlier, Olof and I
have already conveyed this request to the GAC leadership but have not yet heard
back from them .. As you all know, too many important and urgent things are
ongoing simultaneously .. I will send them a reminder and hope to get back to
you soonest .. Meanwhile if you already know GAC colleagues who are interested
it would be good to know who they are .. I can also cc them on my reminder to
the GAC leadership ..
I fully agree to having a face-to-face in Singapore .. and yes,
we can try an informal meeting over lunch this time .. A 6:30 pm meeting on the
Sun. did not find much participants in London .. We can also try to keep it
simple and flexible .. One option may be that each one grabs his/her lunch and
we gather in a room allocated for our meeting ..
Looking forward to hearing views of other colleagues ..
Kind Regards
--Manal
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org]
On Behalf Of Mason Cole
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 2:04 AM
To: Brian Winterfeldt
Cc: gac-gnso-cg@icann.org; gnso-secs@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation
Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
Brian --
Many thanks for this note.
Very helpful.
Speaking in my capacity as
liaison, let me give a short update: I've been in touch with several GAC
members interested in the subject of curative rights mechanisms for IGOs/INGOs
(as I was directed by the council to do) and am seeking the clarification the
council is looking for. You're right that it's a good test case, though
please note not EXACTLY one, as my involvement has started well after the PDP
commenced. I anticipate that for future PDPs, I will contact the GAC at
the issues report phase, or otherwise as early as possible.
It would be tremendously
beneficial for me to have someone in the GAC with whom I could interface
day-to-day. If you know of interested persons, I'm very happy to speak
with them.
I think a face-to-face in
Singapore would be a very productive use of time. Thanks for suggesting
it.
Best --
Mason
On Nov 21, 2014, at 1:49 PM,
Winterfeldt, Brian J. wrote:
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
Brian J. Winterfeldt
Head of Internet Practice
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC
20007-5118
p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244
575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585
p / (212) 940.6762 f / (212) 894.5585
brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com / www.kattenlaw.com
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
Dear All,
Please find the MP3 recording of the GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference
held on Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 1400 UTC at:
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-gac-20141118-en.mp3
On page:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov
The recordings and
transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
Attendees:
Government Advisory Committee
Manal Ismail – co-chair – Egypt
Ana Neves, Portugal
GNSO Council
Brian Winterfeldt, Councilor
David Cake, Vice Chair
GNSO Liaison to the GAC:
Mason Cole
Apology:
Amr Elsadr, Councilor
Suzanne Radell, US
Avri Doria, Councillor
Jonathan Robinson, Chair
ICANN Staff:
Marika Konings
Olof Nordling
Glen de Saint Gery
Karine Perset
Nathalie Peregrine
**
Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Public archives of the mailing
list can be found at:
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Nathalie
Adobe
Chat transcript:
Marika Konings:Welcome to the GAC-GNSO CG meeting of
18 November 2014
Nathalie Peregrine:Brian Winterfeldt has joined the
AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:David cake has joined the call
Ana Neves:sure
Ana Neves:still listening...
Marika Konings:See http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions.htm for ccNSO decisions
Marika Konings:You can see here the recommendation from the
triage committee and the action taken by the ccNSO Council
Marika Konings:Quickly skimming through it, it looks like
that in almost all (if not all) cases, the ccNSO Council has followed the
recommendation of the triage committee
Marika Konings:OK, will do
Ana Neves:keep the momentum is the motto, indeed...
Ana Neves:Thank you and bye
David Cake:Thak you
=========================================================== CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. =========================================================== NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997). =========================================================== |
_______________________________________________
Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg
Mason Cole
VP Communications &
Industry Relations
Donuts Inc.
………………………………
……
……
Ofc +1 503 908 7623
Cell +1 503 407 2555
This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service
supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number
2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
****************************************************************************
This email and its contents are the property of the Department for Culture, Media
and Sport.
If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it.
All DCMS e-mail is recorded and stored for a minimum of 6 months
The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure
Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with
Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified
virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.