Thanks Manal. I too look forward to hearing from others in the CG. Mason On Nov 23, 2014, at 1:35 AM, Manal Ismail wrote:

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: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

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: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/

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. ……………………………… …… …… mason@donuts.co Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ………………………………………… mason@donuts.co Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

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 sradell@ntia.doc.gov 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> [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<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org>; gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> ________________________________ From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.orgOn<mailto: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<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto: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: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ 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: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/ 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<mailto:Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. .................................... ...... ...... mason@donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co> Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555

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 sradell@ntia.doc.gov<mailto:sradell@ntia.doc.gov> 202-482-3167 From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org>; gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto: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> [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<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org>; gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> ________________________________ From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces@icann.orgOn<mailto: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<mailto:gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto: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: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ 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: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/ 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<mailto:Gac-gnso-cg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ……………………………… …… …… mason@donuts.co<mailto:mason@donuts.co> 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.

All -- The agenda looks good to me. FYI, I should have the IGO questions ready for Mark and Suzanne very shortly. Mason On Dec 1, 2014, at 2:45 AM, Manal Ismail wrote:

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 sradell@ntia.doc.gov 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: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

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: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/

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. ……………………………… …… …… mason@donuts.co 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.

Mason Cole VP Communications & Industry Relations Donuts Inc. ………………………………………… mason@donuts.co Ofc +1 503 908 7623 Cell +1 503 407 2555