<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Leon</div><div>Further to the yesterday's call ,pls send the finalized doc. if possible</div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-08-19 11:42 GMT+02:00 Athina Fragkouli <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:athina.fragkouli@ripe.net" target="_blank">athina.fragkouli@ripe.net</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Leon, all,<br>
<br>
Thank you for sharing the matrix with us.<br>
<br>
I understand that this addresses merely CWG issues and that it is only a<br>
description of what the provisions will contain. However, as it also<br>
touches upon CCWG accountability topics, we would like to flag a couple<br>
of issues so that they are properly addressed in the actual bylaws text.<br>
<br>
In particular:<br>
<br>
- Section 7 - IANA Function Review.<br>
It should be clear that this section refers to the IANA naming function<br>
only.<br>
<br>
- Section 9 - Appeal Mechanism<br>
As there is an exception for the ccTLDs, there should also be<br>
such an exception for the numbers related disputes.<br>
<br>
Thank you very much.<br>
<br>
Athina<br>
on behalf of the ASO reps<br>
<span><br>
<br>
On 18/08/15 21:19, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:<br>
> Dear all,<br>
><br>
> As spotted by some, there are some inaccuracies in the matrix that need<br>
> to be taken care of.<br>
><br>
> I will make sure to pass your comments to the CWG Co-Chairs so that they<br>
> can review them with counsel and make the corresponding corrections to<br>
> the document.<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
><br>
><br>
> León<br>
><br>
>> El 14/08/2015, a las 0:47, Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a><br>
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>>> escribió:<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Dear All,<br>
>> It is simple ,please replace the word" approve by " Reject " .<br>
>> Tks<br>
>> Kavouss<br>
>><br>
>> 2015-08-13 11:27 GMT+02:00 <<a href="mailto:Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de">Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a><br>
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de">Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a>>>:<br>
>><br>
>> Dear Julie, Martin, Greg, León,____<br>
>><br>
>> Dear all, ____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> I have a further question about the matrix kindly shared by León,<br>
>> regarding its section on PTI Governance, specifically Section 1<br>
>> subsection (a) (ii), i.e. “ jurisdiction of incorporation (i.e.,<br>
</span>>> to change from California to another jurisdiction)“.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Have the deliberations of the CCWG whether or not a bylaw<br>
>> requirement regarding location of headquarters should be a<br>
>> Fundamental Bylaw (para 241 – 255 of the draft report) been taken<br>
>> into account by the CWG? As I understand, the matrix refers to<br>
>> changes in the ICANN bylaws so I was wondering whether it is fully<br>
</span>>> consistent with the CCWG proposal in this regard.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Best regards____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Sabine Meyer____<br>
>><br>
>> International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance____<br>
>><br>
>> Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy ____<br>
>><br>
>> Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn____<br>
>><br>
>> GERMANY____<br>
>><br>
>> Phone: <a href="tel:%2B49%20228%2099615-2948" value="+49228996152948">+49 228 99615-2948</a> <tel:%2B49%20228%2099615-2948>____<br>
>><br>
>> Fax: <a href="tel:%2B%2049%20228%2099615-2964" value="+49228996152964">+ 49 228 99615-2964</a> <tel:%2B%2049%20228%2099615-2964>____<br>
>><br>
>> E-Mail: <a href="mailto:sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de">sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de">sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a>>____<br>
>><br>
>> Internet: <a href="http://www.bmwi.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://www.bmwi.de</a> <<a href="http://www.bmwi.de/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://www.bmwi.de/</a>>____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> *Von:*<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>><br>
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>>] *Im Auftrag von<br>
>> *Martin Boyle<br>
>> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 12. August 2015 19:09<br>
>> *An:* Greg Shatan; Julie Hammer<br>
>> *Cc:* At-Large Staff; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>; Accountability Cross Community<br>
>> *Betreff:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Not sure why, but I did not see Julie’s original mail.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> I agree with her point. There are also other parts of this<br>
</span>>> section of the matrix that raise questions for me:____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ i. __For all of “2. *ICANN Budget and IANA<br>
>> Budget*” I think CWG should be consulted where it comes to the<br>
>> IANA budget.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ ii. __(a) This is definitely something that<br>
<span>>> needs to be considered by the CWG. I’m not sure about what we<br>
>> mean by “approved budget.” In my mind, PTI prepares its budget in<br>
>> discussion with the OCs so there will be a general expectation<br>
>> that the budget is a community-agreed budget – if it isn’t, there<br>
>> would be reason for the budget to be challenged. So<br>
>> couldn’t/shouldn’t ICANN challenge the budget if there were<br>
>> opposition from the community? I like the idea of a contract<br>
>> commitment (but wouldn’t that undermine a community power in ICANN<br>
>> to veto the IANA budget?) subject to there being a condition in<br>
>> the contract for PTI to develop its budget in consultation with<br>
>> the OCs (the CSC?), given that runaway budgets in the PTI will<br>
</span>>> have a knock-on effect on how much they have to pay to ICANN!____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ iii. __I like the contract-condition approach<br>
<span>>> because the same conditions would need to be transferred to any<br>
</span>>> new operator.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ iv. __(b) Shouldn’t this be a requirement on<br>
<span>>> the PTI? They are the ones with the budget and the obligations<br>
</span>>> that go with it. This would seem to be a contract condition.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ v. __(c) Again a contract condition?____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ vi. __As I noted above, I agree with Julie.<br>
<span>>> “Approval” should be part of PTI’s budget development (especially<br>
>> for things like new investment, enhancing service level<br>
</span>>> expectations, new technology developments).____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> The CSC is an entity associated with the PTI: Is the framework<br>
>> under 5 better included in the contract than in a fundamental<br>
>> bylaw? On the other hand, there will be operational issues and<br>
>> decisions that would fall under the purview of the ccNSO and GNSO<br>
>> (selection of members, recall of members, escalation for example)<br>
>> and these will probably need bylaw changes for the ccNSO and<br>
</span>>> GNSO. would these need to be fundamental bylaws, though?____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Under 6, isn’t this something for the PTI, not ICANN? I guess it<br>
>> could be a condition in the ICANN-PTI contract that the PTI<br>
>> develops a problem-resolution service, but I wonder how a bylaw in<br>
</span>>> ICANN would achieve this.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> 8.(e) talks about separation of PTI, but isn’t it the IANA<br>
>> functions operation that is separated from PTI? And if that<br>
>> happens, there is no reason to do other than wind PTI up as its<br>
</span>>> assets are transferred to the new operator.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> *From:*<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>><br>
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan<br>
>> *Sent:* 12 August 2015 13:14<br>
>> *To:* Julie Hammer<br>
>> *Cc:* At-Large Staff; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>; Accountability Cross Community<br>
>> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Julie,____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> I think you're right. As this was passed on to the whole CWG and<br>
>> CCWG without any prior review by any subcommittees, it should be<br>
</span>>> considered subject to review and comment.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Greg Shatan<br>
>><br>
>> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Julie Hammer<br>
</span>>> <<a href="mailto:julie.hammer@bigpond.com">julie.hammer@bigpond.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:julie.hammer@bigpond.com">julie.hammer@bigpond.com</a>>><br>
>> wrote:____<br>
>><br>
>> Hi Leon,____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Many thanks for sharing this matrix. One thing that struck me<br>
>> when having a quick look through it was that Sidley have listed at<br>
>> Item 2 (d) the following as Subject Matter for a new Fundamental<br>
</span>>> Bylaw:____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> "Requirement that the ICANN community approve or veto the IANA<br>
>> Budget after it has been approved by the ICANN Board but before it<br>
</span>>> has come into effect." ____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> In my understanding, the proposed power was to consider and reject<br>
>> (or veto) the IANA Budget, but there should be no requirement for<br>
>> the ICANN Community to come together and actually approve the IANA<br>
>> budget. I had not thought that the Community Mechanism was<br>
>> intended to be used for such a purpose (ie approving strategic<br>
</span>>> plans, operating plans or budgets).____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> I believe the relevant paragraph from the CCWG 2nd draft report is<br>
</span>>> para 381 on page 58:____<br>
>><br>
>> __379. __381 Accordingly, this new power<br>
<span>>> would give the community the ability to consider strategic and<br>
>> operating plans and budgets (both ICANN general and, separately,<br>
>> with respect to the budget for the IANA Functions) after they are<br>
>> approved by the Board (but before they come into effect) and<br>
>> reject them. The rejection could be of the proposed ICANN Budget<br>
>> or the IANA Budget, or of a proposed ICANN-wide strategic or<br>
>> operating plan. The petition would state which Budget or plan was<br>
>> being subject to veto. A separate petition is required for each<br>
</span>>> Budget or plan being challenged. ____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but I don’t think the<br>
</span>>> word ‘approve’ should appear in 2 (d) in the Sidley matrix.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Cheers, Julie____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> On 12 Aug 2015, at 1:56 am, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía<br>
</span>>> <<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>> wrote:____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Hi all,____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> I am forwarding this matrix that the CWG is working on as it is of<br>
>> the interest of this group as well and to help us continue shaping<br>
</span>>> our work forward.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> The matrix is intended to help identify those bylaws that, from<br>
>> the scope of the CWG, would need to be considered fundamental.<br>
>> This, of course, is independent from the work we need to do but<br>
</span>>> provides an example on what we can begin crafting ourselves.____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
<span>>><br>
>> If you want to keep being in the matrix, swallow the blue pill. If<br>
>> you want to work on shaping the matrix, swallow the red pill.<br>
</span>>> (geek joke)____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Best regards,____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> León____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Inicio del mensaje reenviado:____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> *De: *"Flanagan, Sharon" <<a href="mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com">sflanagan@sidley.com</a>>____<br>
>><br>
>> *Asunto: [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix*____<br>
>><br>
>> *Fecha: *11 de agosto de 2015 9:43:05 GMT-5____<br>
>><br>
>> *Para: *Client Committee <<a href="mailto:cwg-client@icann.org">cwg-client@icann.org</a>>____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> Dear All,____<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> Attached is a draft matrix summarizing the proposed ICANN bylaw<br>
</span>>> changes that relate to CWG’s final proposal. ____<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
>><br>
>> Could you please forward to the CWG?____<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks____<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
>><br>
>> *SHARON* *FLANAGAN*<br>
>> Partner____<br>
>><br>
>> *Sidley Austin LLP<br>
>> *555 California Street<br>
<span>>> Suite 2000<br>
>> San Francisco, CA 94104<br>
</span>>> <a href="tel:%2B1.415.772.1271" value="+14157721271">+1.415.772.1271</a> <tel:%2B1.415.772.1271><br>
>> <a href="mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com">sflanagan@sidley.com</a><br>
>> <a href="http://www.sidley.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">www.sidley.com</a> <<a href="http://www.sidley.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://www.sidley.com/</a>>____<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> ____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> ****************************************************************************************************<br>
>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that<br>
>> is privileged or confidential.<br>
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail<br>
>> and any attachments and notify us<br>
>> immediately.<br>
>><br>
</span>>> ****************************************************************************************************____<br>
>><br>
>> <209588099_1.pdf>____<br>
<span>>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Cwg-client mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Cwg-client@icann.org">Cwg-client@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client____" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client____</a><br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community____" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community____</a><br>
>><br>
>> __ __<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>