<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>We are not bound to that code</div><div>This is a global community environment not necessarily limited to specific local law</div><div>Tks </div><div>Cheers</div><div>Kavouss<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 9 Oct 2015, at 15:59, Chartier, Mike S <<a href="mailto:mike.s.chartier@intel.com">mike.s.chartier@intel.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<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-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Yes, I hear what you’re saying (and don’t have any problem with it, indeed we support the CCWG proposal). I just wonder if it’s an absolute prohibition against
any involvement by the rest of the membership.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">[Non-Lawyer, not admitted in any bars, casinos, or Golden Corrals]<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>
<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"> Greg Shatan [<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 9, 2015 8:33 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Chartier, Mike S<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>>; <a href="mailto:wp1@icann.org">wp1@icann.org</a>; CCWG Accountability<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WP1] Agenda - WP1 mtg - 9 Oct 2015 at 1730-1930 UTC<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Cal Corp Code 5222(b) says nothing about any role in removing a group-elected director for any party other than that group. Quite the opposite. Clauses 2 and 3 both say such a director can be removed "only by" that group.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Any bylaw that gave a role to other groups would be inconsistent with 5222(b).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Greg<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">[Lawyer, but not admitted in CA. This does not constitute legal advice such that an attorney-client relationship is created thereby]<br>
<br>
On Friday, October 9, 2015, Chartier, Mike S <<a href="mailto:mike.s.chartier@intel.com">mike.s.chartier@intel.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<p class="MsoNormal">I'll yield to the lawyers, but I think the intent and letter is to prevent removal without consent. It may be the case that a requirement for the whole community, including the relevant SO/AC, to consent to removal would still be in compliance.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Oct 8, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Edward Morris <<a href="javascript:;">egmorris1@toast.net</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">egmorris1@toast.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi Chris,<br>
<br>
I'm not Robin, and I don't know her position, but mine mirrors the California Corporations Code provision for the removal of Board members selected by specific subgroups, specifically §5222(b) which states:<br>
<br>
(2) If by the provisions of the articles or bylaws the members of<br>
any class, voting as a class, are entitled to elect one or more<br>
directors, any director so elected may be removed only by the<br>
applicable vote of the members of that class.<br>
<br>
(3) If by the provisions of the articles or bylaws the members<br>
within a chapter or other organizational unit, or region or other<br>
geographic grouping, voting as such, are entitled to elect one or<br>
more directors, any director so elected may be removed only by the<br>
applicable vote of the members within the organizational unit or<br>
geographic grouping.<br>
<br>
<br>
There are those on the Board who have argued that the fiduciary duty of directors towards the corporation as a whole augers for removal of individual directors buy the whole rather than by the appointing body. The fiduciary responsibility for ICANN directors
is actually a creature of statute, a creation of the same California Corporations Code that is favourably disposed, as above, towards removal of individual directors by the selecting body.<br>
<br>
I'm a strong believer that the security and stability of the DNS is best assured by tried, true and proven corporate structures. I believe that the uniqueness of ICANN is somewhat overstated. ICANN is a California PBC. PBC's have two basic structures under
California law: one that is board centric (designator) and one that is member centric (membership). Selection of the model determines who is, to paraphrase a former American president, the final decider. Nothing more.<br>
<br>
Regardless of our choice as to model, I see no reason to deviate from the route suggested by California statute for the removal of directors or on any other issue of structural detail. The California PBC statute is tried, true and tested. There is case law
to buttress the statutes. The statute is not risky and untried, as are our other options. It is made as a uniform whole, with deference to potential conflicts. Stability is my principle concern and, as such, I prefer all choices we make to mirror the statute
unless there are strong, special reasons unique to ICANN to deviate from the proven, stable structure of the typical California nonprofit corporation. On this particular issue I see none.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Ed<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
From: "Chris Disspain" <<a href="javascript:;">ceo@auda.org.au</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">ceo@auda.org.au</a>>><br>
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 12:43 AM<br>
To: "Robin Gross" <<a href="javascript:;">robin@ipjustice.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">robin@ipjustice.org</a>>><br>
Cc: <a href="javascript:;">wp1@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">wp1@icann.org</a>>, "CCWG Accountability" <<a href="javascript:;">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>><br>
Subject: Re: [WP1] Agenda - WP1 mtg - 9 Oct 2015 at 1730-1930 UTC<br>
<br>
Hi Robin,<br>
<br>
What’s your position on whether it should be the electing SO/AC that can recall or a wider group?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Chris<br>
<br>
On 9 Oct 2015, at 10:39 , Robin Gross <<a href="javascript:;">robin@ipjustice.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">robin@ipjustice.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Not sure I can make the call tomorrow, so I'll state my position against restrictions to individual director recall rights now.<br>
<br>
Considering the only public comment calling for limitations on the community's right to recall the individual board members was from the board itself, and the consensus has consistently been for NOT restricting recall rights, but for providing rationales for
recalls, I don't understand why we are forced to continue to beat this dead horse. If two public comment periods have not been enough to create anything close to consensus to restrict the community's board recall rights, let's put this issue to bed and focus
on the issues where the community is far more divided.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Robin<br>
<br>
On Oct 8, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Jordan Carter wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi all<br>
<br>
Here is the proposed agenda for our next call: Friday 9 October at 17h30 UTC for up to two hours.<br>
<br>
Could all those proposing documents for this meeting please circulate them ASAP, with an email subject line that identifies what your document is?<br>
<br>
<br>
1. Review of Agenda<br>
<br>
2. Second review of comments analysis:<br>
<br>
a) Budget power<br>
b) Affirmation of Commitments<br>
c) Community Forum<br>
d) Community Mechanism as Sole Member / The Model<br>
e) Recall of ICANN Board<br>
<br>
3. Approach to documenting our work for 12-Oct deadline<br>
<br>
4. Any Other Business<br>
<br>
<br>
Please advise any further / other agenda items...<br>
<br>
<br>
thanks,<br>
Jordan<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jordan Carter<br>
<br>
Chief Executive<br>
InternetNZ<br>
<br>
+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)<br>
Email: <a href="javascript:;">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>><br>
Skype: jordancarter<br>
Web: <a href="http://www.internetnz.nz" target="_blank">www.internetnz.nz</a><<a href="http://www.internetnz.nz/" target="_blank">http://www.internetnz.nz/</a>><br>
<br>
A better world through a better Internet<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;">WP1@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>WP1 mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:WP1@icann.org">WP1@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>