<html>
<body>
In my case, it is not apathy but lack of time.<br><br>
I strongly support Greg on not replacing MAY with SHALL. Perhaps we will
ultimately determine (or define) global public interest, but I personally
think that trying to lock in specific wording is a fools game and will
only get us in trouble. We certainly must understand it better, and that
will likely be an ongoing exercise.<br><br>
Specifically, I am not sure what "shall be determined from time to
time" means. I has the tone of something that will be done every N
years on a regular schedule and that certainly is not what was
meant.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
<br><br>
At 06/07/2016 04:45 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">It's unfortunate that we don't
have time to run this by our counsel, as I would be interested in their
views. Here are mine.<br><br>
I would recommend against filing these comments.<br><br>
FIRST, I disagree with the second point raised. Substituting
"shall" for "may" would incorrectly imply that there
is a <u>requirement</u> that a determination of the global public
interest <u>must</u> take place. We have not asked for such a
requirement and we have not specified any such requirement, which would
render this statement nebulous, ambiguous and undefined. As
currently drafted, <i>if</i> a determination of the global public
interest takes place it will be done by the multistakeholder community
using a bottom-up multistakeholder process, but there is (properly) no
language <u>requiring</u> that such a determination be made.<br><br>
If anyone believes that Final Recommendation 1, para 51 <u>requires</u>
the initiation of a process to determine the global public interest, that
should either be a part of Work Stream 2 or a huge implementation item
for Work Stream 1. As far as I can see, it is neither -- which
further proves that changing "may" to "shall" goes
beyond the recommendations of the CCWG.<br><br>
SECOND, I also disagree with the third point raised.
"Organized" is commonly used in Articles of Incorporation
(indeed, in some states, such as Massachusetts, a non-profit corporation
files Articles of Organization rather than Articles of
Incorporation). As our counsel pointed out on the last call, the
California official form for Articles of Incorporation uses the term
"organized." (See attached) It is a best practice to
stick closely to the official language provided by the jurisdiction --
here it is "organized." This is demonstrated in model
California Articles of Incorporation prepared by Public Counsel, a pro
bono law firm, and available online (see attached or
<a href="http://www.publiccounsel.org/publications?id=0059">
http://www.publiccounsel.org/publications?id=0059</a>). It would be
far preferable if we were to accept the clarification that
"organized" is what's used in this circumstance, rather than to
recommend a change that is at best meaningless and at worst creates the
potential for confusion (since one always looks for meaning in any
change, and confusion could fill the void created by the meaninglessness
of this change). To paraphrase Shakespeare, I don't think the
confusion is in the document, it is in ourselves (or at least in some of
us) -- and it would be better for us to adjust our understanding of the
document, rather than to adjust the document to suit our
misunderstanding.<br><br>
Of course, the language of the CCWG comment is relatively undemanding --
we only ask that "counsel" (whose counsel? ICANN's?) or
"the drafters" (why the difference?) review the language.
We do not justify our quasi-recommendations of changes, other than by
saying that we are confused by the word "organized" and by
demonstrating that we are confused about what is permissive and what is
required.<br><br>
Frankly, I'm far from sure that this comment is widely supported, other
than by apathy or lack of time. I think it would be a mistake for
either of these two recommendations (?) to be adopted, and I hope that
counsel/the drafters, upon further review, let the original drafting
stand.<br><br>
The only thing I agree with is the trivial change from
"further" to "future," which at least does not make
matters worse. This is hardly worth a comment by itself.<br><br>
In sum, I reiterate that I would recommend against filing these
comments.<br><br>
Best regards,<br><br>
Greg<br><br>
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Greg Shatan
<<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>
> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>I agree. This is a legal document, and we should have the
benefit of counsel on this.<br><br>
<dd>Greg<br><br>
<dd>On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:36 PM, James Gannon
<<a href="mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net">james@cyberinvasion.net</a>
> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>While not able to certify anything, if there are issues that our
counsel see I think its important that they are raised.<br><br>
<dd>-James<br><br>
<dd>From:
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of
"Gregory, Holly"
<<a href="mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com">holly.gregory@sidley.com</a>
><br>
<dd>Date: Wednesday 6 July 2016 at 20:32<br>
<dd>To: Thomas Rickert
<<a href="mailto:thomas@rickert.net">thomas@rickert.net</a>>,
Mathieu Weill
<<a href="mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr">mathieu.weill@afnic.fr</a>
>,
"<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>
"
<<a href="mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx">leonfelipe@sanchez.mx</a>>,
Accountability Cross Community
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>, Bernard Turcotte
<<a href="mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com">
turcotte.bernard@gmail.com</a>><br>
<dd>Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Comment for
Public Consultation on Articles of Incorporation (AOC)<br><br>
<dd>Dear Co-Chairs and CCWG-Accountability Members and
Participants, Please let us know if you want Sidley and/or Adler to
comment on this before you post it. We will not do so unless
instructed to. Holly<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>HOLLY J. GREGORY</b><br>
<dd>Partner and Co-Chair, Global Corporate Governance & Executive
Compensation Practice<br><br>
<dd>SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP<br>
</b>
<dd><a href="tel:%2B1%20212%20839%205853">+1 212 839 5853</a><br>
<dd><a href="mailto:holly.gregory@sidley.com">holly.gregory@sidley.com</a>
<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>From:</b>
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of
</b>Bernard Turcotte<br>
<dd>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 06, 2016 3:27 PM<br>
<dd>To:</b> Accountability Cross Community<br>
<dd>Subject:</b> [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - Draft Comment for
Public Consultation on Articles of Incorporation (AOC)<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>All,<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>Please find attached the draft comment to the ICANN public
consultation on the Articles of Incorporation from the
leadership.<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>These comments are based on the questions raised during the CCWG
meeting on the AOC and in consideration of Sam Eisner's response to those
questions.<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>Please respond to the list ASAP if you have comments as this public
consultation closes in a few hours.<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>Bernard Turcotte<br><br>
<dd>ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG Co-Chairs.<br><br>
<dd> <br><br>
<dd>
****************************************************************************************************<br>
<dd>This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is
privileged or confidential.<br>
<dd>If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and
any attachments and notify us<br>
<dd>immediately.<br><br>
<dd>
****************************************************************************************************<br>
<br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<br><br>
</dl><br>
</dl><br>
Content-Type: application/pdf; name="arts-pb.pdf"<br>
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="arts-pb.pdf"<br>
X-Attachment-Id: f_iqbc4wi90<br>
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:toyx27o4zF+B7yBPtDTlcJu35g7RbUKT5tNn9r8DJbSrPW9u47lOxY9A4iwqcFp2P0QBQLtM6vicM+8ryCDvmcWSELQgPa4IAqCkkWRb0y6E2tqyIGbu4h29OuFYAUIISOsRKnewZM+mn8pHGWUhH7XcmmVsz4Qp2IfMpQci0zz0Bh2ZjKTYXoys0ZKUDsZXAQj2nPwI83ZOev0Kv/bktQ==<br>
<br>
Content-Type: application/msword; name="Form_Articles.doc"<br>
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="Form_Articles.doc"<br>
X-Attachment-Id: f_iqbc9ez31<br>
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:toyx27o4zF+B7yBPtDTlcJu35g7RbUKT5tNn9r8DJbSrPW9u47lOxY9A4iwqcFp2P0QBQLtM6vicM+8ryCDvmcWSELQgPa4IAqCkkWRb0y6E2tqyIGbu4h29OuFYAUIISOsRKnewZM+mn8pHGWUhH7XcmmVsz4Qp2IfMpQci0zz0Bh2ZjKTYXoys0ZKUDsZXAQj2nPwI83ZOev0Kv/bktQ==<br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<br>
Content-Disposition: inline<br>
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
1;SN1PR0301MB2030;9:toyx27o4zF+B7yBPtDTlcJu35g7RbUKT5tNn9r8DJbSrPW9u47lOxY9A4iwqcFp2P0QBQLtM6vicM+8ryCDvmcWSELQgPa4IAqCkkWRb0y6E2tqyIGbu4h29OuFYAUIISOsRKnewZM+mn8pHGWUhH7XcmmVsz4Qp2IfMpQci0zz0Bh2ZjKTYXoys0ZKUDsZXAQj2nPwI83ZOev0Kv/bktQ==<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</blockquote></body>
</html>