[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
farzaneh badii
farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
Fri Jul 15 18:00:56 UTC 2016
No. Using the independent legal advisers *responsibly* does not mean that
we have to have a default approach.
I wonder what the next steps would be on this issue. Perhaps co-chairs can
help us on this ? Are we going to have a call and discuss this and come up
with a solution?
On 15 July 2016 at 19:46, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on ensuring access to independent legal adviser whenever required by
> CCWG. This would imply referring to internal legal(staff) by default and
> then call for independent legal advice whenever the group sense there is
> need for clarification (or when the issues at hand is warranted).
>
> Regards
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On 15 Jul 2016 13:19, "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com> wrote:
>
>> Agree with Keith.
>>
>> CCWG must preserve the use of independent legal advisors, but use this
>> responsibly, and with an eye on controlling costs. Ultimately, it is gTLD
>> registrants picking up the bill, and we need to ensure that this work is
>> mindful of their interests.
>>
>> Thanks—
>>
>> J.
>>
>> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
>> Keith Drazek <kdrazek at verisign.com>
>> Date: Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 16:53
>> To: Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org>,
>> Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
>> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <
>> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
>> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>>
>> Agreed. Access to independent legal advice was never in question.
>>
>>
>>
>> That said, in the interest of controlling costs, I have no problem
>> seeking input from ICANN’s internal lawyers on issues that are deemed
>> non-contentious or where potential conflicts do not exist.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am obligated to report that the Registries Stakeholder Group is very,
>> very concerned about the cost of legal fees from WS1 and wants to ensure
>> the CCWG is efficient with its future spending. I know we’re developing
>> cost-control mechanisms for WS2, and I’ve advised my SG accordingly, but
>> this will continue to receive attention from the RySG.
>>
>>
>>
>> Holly’s question and the response about budgeting vis-à-vis ICANN’s
>> outside counsel was instructive. Any and all outside counsel expenses will
>> require certification.
>>
>>
>>
>> So, let me reiterate my view…the CCWG must have access to independent
>> legal advice. We must ensure costs are controlled and resources are used
>> efficiently. If that means selectively turning to ICANN’s lawyers on
>> occasion, I can and do support that, but not at the expense of our ability
>> to seek independent advice.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
>> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Phil
>> Corwin
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 14, 2016 5:34 PM
>> *To:* Matthew Shears; Greg Shatan; Robin Gross
>> *Cc:* Accountability Cross Community
>> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
>> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>>
>>
>>
>> Access to independent legal advice for WS2 issues is fundamental and
>> should be non-negotiable
>>
>>
>>
>> Use your power, Empowered Community
>>
>>
>>
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>> Virtualaw LLC
>> 1155 F Street NW
>> Suite 1050
>> Washington, DC 20004
>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>> 202-255-6172/Cell
>>
>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>
>> "Luck is the residue of design" --- Branch Rickey
>>
>> *From:*mshears at cdt.org
>>
>> *Sent:*July 14, 2016 5:26 PM
>>
>> *To:*gregshatanipc at gmail.com; robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>> *Cc:*accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>
>> *Subject:*Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
>> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>>
>>
>>
>> + 1 well said Robin.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14/07/2016 03:20, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>
>> Robin,
>>
>>
>>
>> Agree 100%.
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>>
>> It is simply a non-starter to suggest that CCWG would lose its right to
>> independent counsel at this stage. I am struggling to understand *where*
>> the suggestion to start this debate all over again even came from. We have
>> very important issues on our agenda for WorkStream 2 that require
>> independence of legal advice: transparency of board deliberations,
>> reforming the DIDP, the CEP, etc., which all involve trying to reform the
>> policies that were created by the in-house legal dept. It is silly to
>> suggest that we must seek the legal advice from those who created the
>> policies we are trying to reform as that would be counter-productive to our
>> goals.
>>
>> Additionally it was revealed in yesterday’s calls, that ICANN’s legal
>> dept fees will be added to the CCWG’s independent fees, so CCWG will be
>> billed for the in-house efforts to resist our reforms (and we won’t be
>> given access to the legal advice that we would be paying for). I think it
>> is extremely important the legal fees NOT be conflated together. We need
>> to understand what the separate costs are, and we cannot be held
>> responsible for spending on Jones Day that is outside of our control. Fees
>> that ICANN corporate undertakes must be separated from fees that CCWG
>> undertakes or the proposed budget process makes absolutely no sense, unless
>> it was intended to tie CCWG’s hands and give ICANN corporate a blank check
>> to spend resisting our reforms.
>>
>> This is an important issue that we cannot roll over on, or everything
>> else we try to do from here on out will be of questionable value. This
>> settled debate should not be re-opened, despite the huge win for ICANN
>> corporate if were to succeed in over-turning this group’s previous decision
>> on this critical matter of independence of legal advice.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:06 PM, Niels ten Oever <lists at nielstenoever.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Also +1 to Greg and +1 to James
>> >
>> > On 07/13/2016 10:50 PM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina wrote:
>> >> Thanks, Greg. +1. Fully agree.
>> >>
>> >> CCWG shall retain the ability to ask for independent advice. Also agree
>> >> that continuing with Sidley Austin and Adler & Colvin is the best
>> option.
>> >>
>> >> + 1 also to James previous email about not reopening the debate.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Tanya
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 13/07/16 22:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
>> >>> Siva,
>> >>>
>> >>> The reasons are all in the record. Please go back and read all of the
>> >>> materials and discussions relating to our desire and choice to hire
>> >>> independent counsel. If you have any specific questions after that,
>> >>> please ask them.
>> >>>
>> >>> I will briefly say the following:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. This has nothing to do with competence, although being generally
>> >>> competent and competent in a specific area are two different things.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2. Where we needed first-hand knowledge or history, we've turned to
>> >>> ICANN legal as one source for such things. That won't change. Advice
>> >>> is another thing entirely.
>> >>>
>> >>> 3. Ask yourself "Who is ICANN legal's client?" and you will have
>> >>> answered your own question.
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com
>> >>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg,
>> >>>
>> >>> How valid are your assumptions? What are the reasons for this
>> >>> unwillingness to make use of ICANN Legal, who are competent, have
>> >>> first hand knowledge and a complete understanding of the legal
>> >>> nuances on matters concerning ICANN, may I ask? Saves money on
>> >>> most matters requiring legal advice, and should there be areas
>> >>> that require specialized advice, we could seek external advice.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Greg Shatan
>> >>> <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gregshatanipc at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I object, and I think many others objected, to the idea that
>> >>> advice from inhouse (i.e., ICANN legal) should be the
>> >>> "default." We retained independent counsel to the CCWG for
>> >>> good reason
>> >>> s
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> and those reasons are still applicable today. I hope we don't
>> >>> need to rehash that.
>> >>>
>> >>> We need the continued ability and discretion to go directly to
>> >>> CCWG's counsel. Requesting inhouse to solicit an opinion from
>> >>> an external counsel is not only "cumbersome," it's absolutely
>> >>> antithetical to the relationship between CCWG and its
>> >>> independent counsel.
>> >>>
>> >>> I strongly believe that the "default" must be the status quo,
>> >>> i.e., that the CCWG (through reasonable processes) has the
>> >>> ability and discretion to turn to its own counsel. Further, I
>> >>> strongly believe that CCWG's independent counsel must remain
>> >>> Sidley Austin and Adler & Colvin. They have been up a
>> >>> tremendous learning curve and worked with us every step of the
>> >>> way. It would be folly to cast that aside. It's worth noting
>> >>> that Sidley is a full-service law firm with offices outside
>> >>> the US in Beijing, Brussels, Geneva, Hong Kong, London,
>> >>> Munich, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney and Tokyo. I'm confident
>> >>> that Sidley (and Adler) will (a) tell us when they don't have
>> >>> the expertise to help us, and (b) work with us on working
>> >>> methods to make our use of the firms more cost-effective.
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Rudolph Daniel
>> >>> <rudi.daniel at gmail.com
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rudi.daniel at gmail.com');>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Based on comments on the call today, IMO; A good body of
>> >>> knowledge was accquired on the subject of legal requests
>> >>> in wg1. WG2 legal resources would be both inhouse and
>> >>> external, from start, We should be much more efficient
>> >>> this time around. Each sub however will have their needs
>> >>> and there may be requests applicable across the subgroups
>> >>> and/or specific to a subgroup.
>> >>> So, that suggests close relationship between budget
>> >>> control and the former legal request team [reconfigured
>> >>> and/or augmented] who would have to coordinate requests
>> >>> across ws2 sub
>> >>> groups as i see it.
>> >>> What determines the initial choice inhouse/external
>> >>> resources may be a matter of consensus, but it may be
>> >>> prudent to consider the process as [default] inhouse with
>> >>> the flexible and necessary option of external sources by
>> >>> consensus [as the fog clears so to speak]. I think it may
>> >>> be cumbersome to request inhouse to solicit an opinion
>> >>> from an external, because there may arise an instance
>> >>> where; on the strength of an opinion, [inhouse or
>> >>> external] ; a wg2 may wish to reframe and seek
>> >>> alternative advise elswhere.
>> >>> rd
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Rudi Daniel
>> >>> /danielcharles consulting
>> >>> <
>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774
>> >/
>> >>> *
>> >>> *
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Vinay Kesari
>> >>> <vinay.kesari at gmail.com
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','vinay.kesari at gmail.com');>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Dear all,
>> >>>
>> >>> I was unfortunately unable to join the call as I was
>> >>> on a flight at the time, my apologies. I've just had a
>> >>> chance to catch up on the Adobe Connect recording, and
>> >>> I'm happy to reconfirm my willingness and availability
>> >>> to serve as a rapporteur. Also, I agree with the
>> >>> thrust of Kavouss' comment at 0:24:30, and affirm my
>> >>> commitment to serve impartially. I look forward to
>> >>> working with Greg on the jurisdiction subgroup.
>> >>>
>> >>> Separately, on the issue of allocation of legal
>> >>> requests, I agree that we need further discussion, and
>> >>> endorse creating an Option 3 based on the points made
>> >>> and the specific requirements of the different WS2
>> >>> subgroups.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Vinay
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 12 July 2016 at 20:55, Mathieu Weill
>> >>> <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>> ');>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Dear Colleagues,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Attached is a short set of slides to support our
>> >>> discussion on agenda item #4
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Talk to you in a few hours
>> >>>
>> >>> Mathieu
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *De :*
>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>
>> >>> [mailto:
>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>]
>> >>> *De la part de* MSSI Secretariat
>> >>> *Envoyé :* lundi 11 juillet 2016 19:46
>> >>> *À :* CCWG-Accountability
>> >>> *Objet :* [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT
>> >>> Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Good day all,
>> >>>
>> >>> In preparation for your call, CCWG Accountability
>> >>> WS2 Meeting #2
>> >>> <https://community.icann.org/x/FyOOAw>– Tuesday,
>> >>> 12 July @ 20:00 – 22:00 UTC. Time zone converter
>> >>> here
>> >>> <
>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG+Accountability+Meeting&iso=20160712T20&p1=1440&ah=2
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *Proposed Agenda:*
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. Welcome, SOI
>> >>>
>> >>> 2.
>> >>> Articles of Incorporation : finalize submission
>> >>>
>> >>> 3.
>> >>> Appointment of rapporteurs for WS2 – next steps
>> >>>
>> >>> 4.
>> >>> Legal Cost Control Mechanism : initial discussion
>> >>>
>> >>> 5. AOB
>> >>>
>> >>> 6. Closing
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *Adobe Connect:
>> >>> *https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/
>> >>> <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> With kind regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> Brenda Brewer
>> >>>
>> >>> MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant
>> >>>
>> >>> ICANN-**Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
>> >>> and Numbers
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
>> >>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
>> >>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
>> >>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
>> >>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Sivasubramanian M <
>> https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Niels ten Oever
>> > Head of Digital
>> >
>> > Article 19
>> > www.article19.org
>> >
>> > PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>> > 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------
>>
>> Matthew Shears
>>
>> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>>
>> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
>>
>> + 44 771 2472987
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4613/12558 - Release Date: 07/04/16
>> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
--
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160715/7c7a5233/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list