[CCWG-ACCT] FW: [Acct-Legal] Memo - Revised Powers Chart, Voluntary Model

Fri Jun 12 17:51:54 UTC 2015

Hi,

Good way of putting the issue.

I especially hang on to the words: through its existing structures --
the SOs and ACs.

avri

On 12-Jun-15 12:05, Drazek, Keith wrote:
>
> Thanks Becky,
>
> I think you highlight a key point.
>
> Currently, NTIA and the California Attorney General are the only
> enforcement bodies ensuring ICANN remains committed to its bylaws.
>
> The membership structure would give some of that authority to the
> ICANN community through its existing structures -- the SOs and ACs.
>
> Isn’t that the definition of transitioning the United States
> government (in its various forms) out of its unique role?
>
> After NTIA disengages, don’t we want the community to have shared
> authority for enforcement, rather than leaving it to the California
> Attorney General alone?
>
> Regards,
> Keith
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Burr, Becky
> *Sent:* Friday, June 12, 2015 11:07 AM
> *To:* Roelof Meijer; Accountability Cross Community
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] FW: [Acct-Legal] Memo - Revised Powers
> Chart, Voluntary Model
>
>  
>
> Roelof,
>
> shi
>
> As I understand it, Courts view the bylaws as a contract between a
> corporation and its members/shareholders.  If ICANN has no members,
> the bylaws are not a contract with anyone, so the only party with
> authority to enforce would be the Attorney General.  (As discussed
> elsewhere, this is extremely unlikely to happen outside of a
> fraud/corruption situation.)
>
>  
>
> The fact that members of SO’s are legal entities doesn’t change this.
>  Unless they are members of ICANN, they are not a party to the bylaws
> “contract.”
>
>  
>
> B
>
> J. Beckwith Burr
>
> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>
> Office: + 1.202.533.2932  Mobile: 
> +1.202.352.6367  / becky.burr at neustar.biz
> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz>
>
>  
>
> *From: *Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl
> <mailto:Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>>
> *Date: *Friday, June 12, 2015 at 8:18 AM
> *To: *Accountability Community
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> *Subject: *[CCWG-ACCT] FW: [Acct-Legal] Memo - Revised Powers Chart,
> Voluntary Model
>
>  
>
> Dear all, and especially dear legal colleagues,
>
>  
>
> The memo states:
>
>  
>
> "If there were a dispute between ICANN and an SO/AC, the parties could
> agree to an IRP and binding arbitration, but there would be no
> mechanism to restrain ICANN from acting contrary to these decisions,
> nor would there be a mechanism to challenge an arbitration decision
> that exceeded the scope of authority of the arbitration panel, outside
> an unlikely, independent intervention by the California Attorney
> General. "
>
>  
>
> I understand that the SO/AC’s, not being legal entities, cannot take
> legal action to enforce. However, does that really equal "no mechanism
> to restrain ICANN from acting contrary to these decisions”?
>
>  
>
> Most members of SO’s are legal entities, many members of AC’s are too,
> couldn’t those members, being affected parties, individually or
> collectively take legal action?
>
>  
>
> Alternatively, I would assume that before the ultimate step of talking
> legal action against ICANN, the community will have escalated through
> its powers and thus has completed the procedure to recall the entire
> board. The power to recall the entire board will have to be combined
> with the power to in one way or another appoint an interim board. So,
> the community, through due process, recalls the board. The board, in
> contradiction with the bylaws, refuses “to go”. The community has
> recalled the board and thus, through the defined process (also in the
> bylaws), appoints an interim board. According to the bylaws, this
> interim board is now the legal representative of ICANN. And can take
> the required legal action (if necessary) to force the “old” board to
> go away and get lost.
>
>  
>
> Would one of these two work?
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
>  
>
> Roelof Meijer
>
>  
>
> *From: *<Hofheimer>, "Joshua T." <jhofheimer at sidley.com
> <mailto:jhofheimer at sidley.com>>
> *Date: *donderdag 11 juni 2015 06:09
> *To: *"ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>"
> <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>>
> *Cc: *Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com
> <mailto:sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com>>, ICANN-Adler
> <ICANN at adlercolvin.com <mailto:ICANN at adlercolvin.com>>
> *Subject: *[Acct-Legal] Memo - Revised Powers Chart, Voluntary Model
>
>  
>
> Dear Legal Sub-Team,
>
>  
>
> Further to the CCWG request on the call last Friday, attached is a
> memo revising the summary chart describing the viability of the
> enumerated powers under the three models – Member model, Designator
> Model and Voluntary Model.  We also explore the impact of not having
> the SO/ACs organized legal persons to represent their interests.
>
>  
>
> Cheers,
>
> Josh
>
> *JOSHUA* *HOFHEIMER  *
>
> Sidley Austin LLP
> +1.213.896.6061 (LA direct)
> +1.650.565.7561 (PA direct)
> +1.323.708.2405 (cell)
> jhofheimer at sidley.com <mailto:jhofheimer at sidley.com>
> www.sidley.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidley.com_&d=AwMF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=QOhQjQwFElYq1-xAGs6TVUWxpVd3OZaCVRq9bV-0pUg&s=8g0nj7XBKequ4xTeqTLzy3EvyRZsOpZlGqNG7PIfFS4&e=>
>
> http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidley.com_&d=AwMF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=QOhQjQwFElYq1-xAGs6TVUWxpVd3OZaCVRq9bV-0pUg&s=8g0nj7XBKequ4xTeqTLzy3EvyRZsOpZlGqNG7PIfFS4&e=> *SIDLEY
> AUSTIN LLP*
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Hilton,
> Tyler
> *Sent:* Monday, June 08, 2015 8:29 PM
> *To:* ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Acct-Legal] Memo - Responses to CCWG GAC Questions
>
>  
>
> Dear Legal Sub-team,
>
>  
>
> Attached please find a memo responding to the list of questions from
> the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) provided to us on June 5, 2015.
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
>  
>
> *TYLER* *HILTON*
> Associate
>
> Sidley Austin LLP
> 555 West Fifth Street
> Los Angeles, CA 90013
> +1.213.896.6130
> thilton at sidley.com <mailto:thilton at sidley.com>
> www.sidley.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidley.com&d=AwMF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=QOhQjQwFElYq1-xAGs6TVUWxpVd3OZaCVRq9bV-0pUg&s=RZAttuK9gIR-rWhgnzzBCJwmd-AX6TvLB6W-cfwGyV4&e=>
>
> http://www.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SA-autosig.png
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidley.com_&d=AwMF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=QOhQjQwFElYq1-xAGs6TVUWxpVd3OZaCVRq9bV-0pUg&s=8g0nj7XBKequ4xTeqTLzy3EvyRZsOpZlGqNG7PIfFS4&e=> *SIDLEY
> AUSTIN LLP*
>
>  
>
>  
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
> 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.
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus