<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Agree.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I think the level of consent ultimately reduces to whatever consent is needed to amend the bylaw, however.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Steve DelBianco<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, September 29, 2015 8:29 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jordan Carter; Accountability Cross Community<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] A way to avoid the 'The Single Member Can Do Anything!' problem<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Good idea to start this thread, Jordan. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I learned in Los Angeles that Jones Day had not noticed how CCWG proposed to restrict the single member’s ability to exercise some statutory powers (such as dissolving the corporation
or forcing a new bylaw). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">So, first step is hear whether Jones Day now supports our notion of using bylaws to require an extraordinary level of consensus in the community before such powers could be used.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I appreciate your idea of adding the Board to the other AC/SO community who would have to approve the Single Member exercising those extreme powers. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">But I think we should start by requiring unanimous consent of the ACs and SOs defined in ICANN bylaws. Then, if Jones Day says THAT'S not enough, we could add the board too. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Jordan Carter<br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 8:15 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Accountability Cross Community<br>
<b>Subject: </b>[CCWG-ACCT] A way to avoid the 'The Single Member Can Do Anything!' problem<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Hi all
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">One of the pieces of feedback from Board members I heard in L.A. was a concern that basically goes like this:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">"The Single Member is a problematic idea because of the incredible powers it has under California law - for instance, it could even dissolve ICANN!"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">There were some sub-themes to this concern:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">- the accountability of SO/AC actors in exercising the powers intended for the CMSM<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">- the absence of fiduciary duties on the Single Member in making its decisions<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">- the engineering principle of minimal change at a time<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Focusing on the overarching concern, it was a tenet of the CCWG's Second Draft Proposal that the CMSM should be largely ruled out from exercising any of the powers the community
didn't propose it had. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">That is, aside from the five community powers and the ability to enforce the bylaws against the Board, the other powers the California law grants to member/s (document inspection,
dissolve the company, etc), should face such high thresholds to action that they can, practically speaking, never be actioned at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">[The Second Draft Proposal may not have been terribly clear about this, but that's what it was driving at.]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">So how to resolve this? The CCWG's choice of a Single Member (following its earlier choice of multiple members) was to meet the accountability requirements the community has asked
for. But nobody asked for the community to have these other powers.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Here is a suggestion.</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">For the exercise of any of the Member Powers the CMSM would have (beyond those we "want" it to have), why don't we include the ICANN Board as one of the groups that has to vote
/ come to consensus to exercise them?</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">This sounds a little strange on the face of it but think it through.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">This seems to me to be a very simple way to avoid the problem.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">It acknowledges that the rights of the Member are set out in law and can't be eroded - that they can only be managed by the decisions that member is able to take. And it acknowledges
that the concerns about constraining the possible actions of the member to those that are intended, should be solved. It shares power in the model in quite a nice, dare-I-say-it, "multistakeholder" way.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">I'd welcome others' thoughts. I'd welcome views from our lawyers about this, too. On the face of it I can't see any reason this wouldn't work in law, since the CMSM can be comprised
of any set of ICANN actors. But - I Am Not A Lawyer.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">cheers<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Jordan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">--
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Jordan Carter<br>
<br>
Chief Executive <br>
<b>InternetNZ</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank"><span style="color:#1155CC">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</span></a> <br>
Skype: jordancarter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Web:
<a href="http://www.internetnz.nz" target="_blank">www.internetnz.nz</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<i>A better world through a better Internet </i><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>