<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Dear Kavouss,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">We will be reaching out to CWG Co-Chairs to coordinate and propose adjustments flagged by our group. As soon as a final version becomes available, we will be glad to share it with all.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div class="">Best regards,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">León</div>
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">El 19/08/2015, a las 7:16, Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" class="">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>> escribió:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="">Dear Leon</div><div class="">Further to the yesterday's call ,pls send the finalized doc. if possible</div><div class="">Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">2015-08-19 11:42 GMT+02:00 Athina Fragkouli <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:athina.fragkouli@ripe.net" target="_blank" class="">athina.fragkouli@ripe.net</a>></span>:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Leon, all,<br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you for sharing the matrix with us.<br class="">
<br class="">
I understand that this addresses merely CWG issues and that it is only a<br class="">
description of what the provisions will contain. However, as it also<br class="">
touches upon CCWG accountability topics, we would like to flag a couple<br class="">
of issues so that they are properly addressed in the actual bylaws text.<br class="">
<br class="">
In particular:<br class="">
<br class="">
- Section 7 - IANA Function Review.<br class="">
It should be clear that this section refers to the IANA naming function<br class="">
only.<br class="">
<br class="">
- Section 9 - Appeal Mechanism<br class="">
As there is an exception for the ccTLDs, there should also be<br class="">
such an exception for the numbers related disputes.<br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you very much.<br class="">
<br class="">
Athina<br class="">
on behalf of the ASO reps<br class="">
<span class=""><br class="">
<br class="">
On 18/08/15 21:19, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:<br class="">
> Dear all,<br class="">
><br class="">
> As spotted by some, there are some inaccuracies in the matrix that need<br class="">
> to be taken care of.<br class="">
><br class="">
> I will make sure to pass your comments to the CWG Co-Chairs so that they<br class="">
> can review them with counsel and make the corresponding corrections to<br class="">
> the document.<br class="">
><br class="">
> Best regards,<br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
> León<br class="">
><br class="">
>> El 14/08/2015, a las 0:47, Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" class="">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a><br class="">
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" class="">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>>> escribió:<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Dear All,<br class="">
>> It is simple ,please replace the word" approve by " Reject " .<br class="">
>> Tks<br class="">
>> Kavouss<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> 2015-08-13 11:27 GMT+02:00 <<a href="mailto:Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de" class="">Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a><br class="">
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de" class="">Sabine.Meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a>>>:<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Dear Julie, Martin, Greg, León,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Dear all, ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> I have a further question about the matrix kindly shared by León,<br class="">
>> regarding its section on PTI Governance, specifically Section 1<br class="">
>> subsection (a) (ii), i.e. “ jurisdiction of incorporation (i.e.,<br class="">
</span>>> to change from California to another jurisdiction)“.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Have the deliberations of the CCWG whether or not a bylaw<br class="">
>> requirement regarding location of headquarters should be a<br class="">
>> Fundamental Bylaw (para 241 – 255 of the draft report) been taken<br class="">
>> into account by the CWG? As I understand, the matrix refers to<br class="">
>> changes in the ICANN bylaws so I was wondering whether it is fully<br class="">
</span>>> consistent with the CCWG proposal in this regard.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Best regards____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Sabine Meyer____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> GERMANY____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Phone: <a href="tel:%2B49%20228%2099615-2948" value="+49228996152948" class="">+49 228 99615-2948</a> <tel:%2B49%20228%2099615-2948>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Fax: <a href="tel:%2B%2049%20228%2099615-2964" value="+49228996152964" class="">+ 49 228 99615-2964</a> <tel:%2B%2049%20228%2099615-2964>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> E-Mail: <a href="mailto:sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de" class="">sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de" class="">sabine.meyer@bmwi.bund.de</a>>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Internet: <a href="http://www.bmwi.de/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">http://www.bmwi.de</a> <<a href="http://www.bmwi.de/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">http://www.bmwi.de/</a>>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *Von:*<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>><br class="">
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>>] *Im Auftrag von<br class="">
>> *Martin Boyle<br class="">
>> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 12. August 2015 19:09<br class="">
>> *An:* Greg Shatan; Julie Hammer<br class="">
>> *Cc:* At-Large Staff; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>; Accountability Cross Community<br class="">
>> *Betreff:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Not sure why, but I did not see Julie’s original mail.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> I agree with her point. There are also other parts of this<br class="">
</span>>> section of the matrix that raise questions for me:____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ i. __For all of “2. *ICANN Budget and IANA<br class="">
>> Budget*” I think CWG should be consulted where it comes to the<br class="">
>> IANA budget.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ ii. __(a) This is definitely something that<br class="">
<span class="">>> needs to be considered by the CWG. I’m not sure about what we<br class="">
>> mean by “approved budget.” In my mind, PTI prepares its budget in<br class="">
>> discussion with the OCs so there will be a general expectation<br class="">
>> that the budget is a community-agreed budget – if it isn’t, there<br class="">
>> would be reason for the budget to be challenged. So<br class="">
>> couldn’t/shouldn’t ICANN challenge the budget if there were<br class="">
>> opposition from the community? I like the idea of a contract<br class="">
>> commitment (but wouldn’t that undermine a community power in ICANN<br class="">
>> to veto the IANA budget?) subject to there being a condition in<br class="">
>> the contract for PTI to develop its budget in consultation with<br class="">
>> the OCs (the CSC?), given that runaway budgets in the PTI will<br class="">
</span>>> have a knock-on effect on how much they have to pay to ICANN!____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ iii. __I like the contract-condition approach<br class="">
<span class="">>> because the same conditions would need to be transferred to any<br class="">
</span>>> new operator.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ iv. __(b) Shouldn’t this be a requirement on<br class="">
<span class="">>> the PTI? They are the ones with the budget and the obligations<br class="">
</span>>> that go with it. This would seem to be a contract condition.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ v. __(c) Again a contract condition?____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ vi. __As I noted above, I agree with Julie.<br class="">
<span class="">>> “Approval” should be part of PTI’s budget development (especially<br class="">
>> for things like new investment, enhancing service level<br class="">
</span>>> expectations, new technology developments).____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> The CSC is an entity associated with the PTI: Is the framework<br class="">
>> under 5 better included in the contract than in a fundamental<br class="">
>> bylaw? On the other hand, there will be operational issues and<br class="">
>> decisions that would fall under the purview of the ccNSO and GNSO<br class="">
>> (selection of members, recall of members, escalation for example)<br class="">
>> and these will probably need bylaw changes for the ccNSO and<br class="">
</span>>> GNSO. would these need to be fundamental bylaws, though?____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Under 6, isn’t this something for the PTI, not ICANN? I guess it<br class="">
>> could be a condition in the ICANN-PTI contract that the PTI<br class="">
>> develops a problem-resolution service, but I wonder how a bylaw in<br class="">
</span>>> ICANN would achieve this.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> 8.(e) talks about separation of PTI, but isn’t it the IANA<br class="">
>> functions operation that is separated from PTI? And if that<br class="">
>> happens, there is no reason to do other than wind PTI up as its<br class="">
</span>>> assets are transferred to the new operator.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *From:*<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>><br class="">
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan<br class="">
>> *Sent:* 12 August 2015 13:14<br class="">
>> *To:* Julie Hammer<br class="">
>> *Cc:* At-Large Staff; <a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org" class="">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>>; Accountability Cross Community<br class="">
>> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-Stewardship] [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Julie,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> I think you're right. As this was passed on to the whole CWG and<br class="">
>> CCWG without any prior review by any subcommittees, it should be<br class="">
</span>>> considered subject to review and comment.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Greg Shatan<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Julie Hammer<br class="">
</span>>> <<a href="mailto:julie.hammer@bigpond.com" class="">julie.hammer@bigpond.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:julie.hammer@bigpond.com" class="">julie.hammer@bigpond.com</a>>><br class="">
>> wrote:____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Hi Leon,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Many thanks for sharing this matrix. One thing that struck me<br class="">
>> when having a quick look through it was that Sidley have listed at<br class="">
>> Item 2 (d) the following as Subject Matter for a new Fundamental<br class="">
</span>>> Bylaw:____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> "Requirement that the ICANN community approve or veto the IANA<br class="">
>> Budget after it has been approved by the ICANN Board but before it<br class="">
</span>>> has come into effect." ____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> In my understanding, the proposed power was to consider and reject<br class="">
>> (or veto) the IANA Budget, but there should be no requirement for<br class="">
>> the ICANN Community to come together and actually approve the IANA<br class="">
>> budget. I had not thought that the Community Mechanism was<br class="">
>> intended to be used for such a purpose (ie approving strategic<br class="">
</span>>> plans, operating plans or budgets).____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> I believe the relevant paragraph from the CCWG 2nd draft report is<br class="">
</span>>> para 381 on page 58:____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __379. __381 Accordingly, this new power<br class="">
<span class="">>> would give the community the ability to consider strategic and<br class="">
>> operating plans and budgets (both ICANN general and, separately,<br class="">
>> with respect to the budget for the IANA Functions) after they are<br class="">
>> approved by the Board (but before they come into effect) and<br class="">
>> reject them. The rejection could be of the proposed ICANN Budget<br class="">
>> or the IANA Budget, or of a proposed ICANN-wide strategic or<br class="">
>> operating plan. The petition would state which Budget or plan was<br class="">
>> being subject to veto. A separate petition is required for each<br class="">
</span>>> Budget or plan being challenged. ____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but I don’t think the<br class="">
</span>>> word ‘approve’ should appear in 2 (d) in the Sidley matrix.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Cheers, Julie____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> On 12 Aug 2015, at 1:56 am, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía<br class="">
</span>>> <<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx" class="">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>> wrote:____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Hi all,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> I am forwarding this matrix that the CWG is working on as it is of<br class="">
>> the interest of this group as well and to help us continue shaping<br class="">
</span>>> our work forward.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> The matrix is intended to help identify those bylaws that, from<br class="">
>> the scope of the CWG, would need to be considered fundamental.<br class="">
>> This, of course, is independent from the work we need to do but<br class="">
</span>>> provides an example on what we can begin crafting ourselves.____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> If you want to keep being in the matrix, swallow the blue pill. If<br class="">
>> you want to work on shaping the matrix, swallow the red pill.<br class="">
</span>>> (geek joke)____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Best regards,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> León____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Inicio del mensaje reenviado:____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *De: *"Flanagan, Sharon" <<a href="mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com" class="">sflanagan@sidley.com</a>>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *Asunto: [client com] ICANN Bylaws Matrix*____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *Fecha: *11 de agosto de 2015 9:43:05 GMT-5____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *Para: *Client Committee <<a href="mailto:cwg-client@icann.org" class="">cwg-client@icann.org</a>>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Dear All,____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> Attached is a draft matrix summarizing the proposed ICANN bylaw<br class="">
</span>>> changes that relate to CWG’s final proposal. ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Could you please forward to the CWG?____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> Thanks____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *SHARON* *FLANAGAN*<br class="">
>> Partner____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> *Sidley Austin LLP<br class="">
>> *555 California Street<br class="">
<span class="">>> Suite 2000<br class="">
>> San Francisco, CA 94104<br class="">
</span>>> <a href="tel:%2B1.415.772.1271" value="+14157721271" class="">+1.415.772.1271</a> <tel:%2B1.415.772.1271><br class="">
>> <a href="mailto:sflanagan@sidley.com" class="">sflanagan@sidley.com</a><br class="">
>> <a href="http://www.sidley.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">www.sidley.com</a> <<a href="http://www.sidley.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">http://www.sidley.com/</a>>____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> ____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> ****************************************************************************************************<br class="">
>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that<br class="">
>> is privileged or confidential.<br class="">
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail<br class="">
>> and any attachments and notify us<br class="">
>> immediately.<br class="">
>><br class="">
</span>>> ****************************************************************************************************____<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> <209588099_1.pdf>____<br class="">
<span class="">>><br class="">
>> _______________________________________________<br class="">
>> Cwg-client mailing list<br class="">
>> <a href="mailto:Cwg-client@icann.org" class="">Cwg-client@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client____" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client____</a><br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>> _______________________________________________<br class="">
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br class="">
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" class="">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br class="">
>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community____" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community____</a><br class="">
>><br class="">
>> __ __<br class="">
>><br class="">
>><br class="">
>> _______________________________________________<br class="">
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br class="">
>> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" class="">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br class="">
</span>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" class="">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>><br class="">
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br class="">
>><br class="">
>><br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
><br class="">
> _______________________________________________<br class="">
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br class="">
> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" class="">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br class="">
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br class="">
><br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" class="">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br class="">
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br class="">
</div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>