[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

[Silver, Bradley]

Thanks Milton – I agree “based on previously agreed language” could be unclear.  I’d prefer to have language which preserve grandfathering for terms which are not substantively different from an agreed term.  Merely tweaking the phrasing of a term or condition without changing its substance, shouldn’t exclude a term from the grandfathering – I don’t think that’s what we intended.

From: Mueller, Milton L [mailto:milton at gatech.edu]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2016 11:00 AM
To: Silver, Bradley; Bernard Turcotte; Accountability Cross Community
Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

Bradley
Your proposed modification is on the right track, but I have trouble with the vagueness of “based on previously agreed language.” I see endless debates about whether some new term is “based on” agreed language or not. So why not just say this:

“Previous discussions within the CCWG-Accountability while preparing the Bylaws Draft led to the conclusion that grandfathering of renewals were acceptable for these types of agreements,  but would not extend to any new term or condition.”


Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology




From: Silver, Bradley [mailto:Bradley.Silver at timewarner.com]
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 3:12 PM
To: Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu<mailto:milton at gatech.edu>>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard at gmail.com<mailto:turcotte.bernard at gmail.com>>; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

The language may be read to imply that the addition of any new terms would take those agreements out of the grandfathering altogether, which is not what was intended – only the new terms.  I suggest clarifying that as follows -

Previous discussions within the CCWG-Accountability while preparing the Bylaws Draft led to the conclusion that grandfathering of renewals were acceptable for these types of agreements,  but would not extend to any new term or condition which was not based on previously agreed language.





From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 2:21 PM
To: Mueller, Milton L; Bernard Turcotte; Accountability Cross Community
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

Also, related to this, shouldn’t the recommendation in 2.3 propose adding this language to the bylaws?


“…as long as these renewals did not include any new terms. Any new terms would need to be within the scope and mission of ICANN.”


From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 2:16 PM
To: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard at gmail.com<mailto:turcotte.bernard at gmail.com>>; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

Bernard
One quick comment.
I was pleased to see the renewals of the RA/RAA flagged in 2.2. I think the comment is attempting to do the right thing, but I find the language phrased in a way that seems to create an unintentional ambiguity.


Under 2.2 you say:



“…as long as these renewals did not include any new term based on previously agreed language. Any new terms would however need to be within the scope and mission of ICANN.”



I do not understand the function or intent of the words “based on previously agreed language.” If the language is previously agreed, how can it be a new term? Did you mean to simply say:



“…as long as these renewals did not include any new terms. Any new terms would need to be within the scope and mission of ICANN.”

--MM
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Turcotte
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 11:36 AM
To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Response to Public Consultation on New Bylaws - 72 hour consultation for the CCWG-Accountability

All,

As discussed on the call this week please find attached the draft response of the CCWG-Accountability to the public consultation on the new Bylaws.

This document was developed from the meeting notes of our call on May 3rd and reviewed by the leadership team.

As discussed at that meeting we are providing the CCWG-Accountability a 72 hour comment period on this draft response
beginning 1800UTC Friday May 6th and closing 1800UTC Monday May 9th.

Please post your comments to the main CCWG-Accountability list, used to send this email, and please use the same SUBJECT to
facilitate tracking of comments (or simply REPLY to this email).

Thank you

Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs

=================================================================
Reminder: Any email that requests your login credentials or that asks you to click on a link could be a phishing attack.  If you have any questions regarding the authenticity of this email or its sender, please contact the IT Service Desk at 212.484.6000 or via email at ITServices at timewarner.com<mailto:ITServices at timewarner.com>

=================================================================

=================================================================
This message is the property of Time Warner Inc. and is intended only for the use of the
addressee(s) and may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended
recipient, he or she is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, printing, forwarding,
or any method of copying of this information, and/or the taking of any action in reliance on
the information herein is strictly prohibited except by the intended recipient or those to whom
he or she intentionally distributes this message. If you have received this communication in
error, please immediately notify the sender, and delete the original message and any copies
from your computer or storage system. Thank you.
=================================================================

=================================================================
Reminder: Any email that requests your login credentials or that asks you to click on a link could be a phishing attack.  If you have any questions regarding the authenticity of this email or its sender, please contact the IT Service Desk at 212.484.6000 or via email at ITServices at timewarner.com<mailto:ITServices at timewarner.com>

=================================================================

=================================================================
This message is the property of Time Warner Inc. and is intended only for the use of the
addressee(s) and may be legally privileged and/or confidential. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended
recipient, he or she is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, printing, forwarding,
or any method of copying of this information, and/or the taking of any action in reliance on
the information herein is strictly prohibited except by the intended recipient or those to whom
he or she intentionally distributes this message. If you have received this communication in
error, please immediately notify the sender, and delete the original message and any copies
from your computer or storage system. Thank you.
=================================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160509/7987ce36/attachment-0001.html>