[bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC

[Phil Corwin]

Clearly, based upon what I sent earlier today, I disagree with Marilyn on this matter.

But, regardless of the substance, I have questions about the process followed on this matter. There is no way to determine whether there is sufficient consensus among BC members without first providing them with the draft GNSO letter as well as some analysis as to whether and how it is at odds with prior BC policy statements. Instead, it has been presumed up front that consensus does not exist and a BC position of abstention has been conveyed to the GNSO before the BC as a whole has had any opportunity to consider the matter. 

It may well be that no consensus exists and that a default position of abstention properly reflects that, but I think BC members should have some opportunity for input before a Constituency position is conveyed.

Philip S. Corwin 
Partner 
Butera & Andrews 
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
Suite 500 
Washington, DC 20004

202-347-6875 (office) 

202-347-6876 (fax)

202-255-6172 (cell)

"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marilyn Cade 
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 1:51 PM
To: Philip Sheppard ; bc-gnso at icann.org 
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC


I would support an abstention. First, positions like this deserve broader BC discussion, and as noted by Philip, there are items where there may not be membership consensus. 

Marilyn Cade
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard at aim.be>

Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 12:20:36 
To: <bc-gnso at icann.org>
Subject: [bc-gnso] Draft GNSO Council letter to the GAC


 
 Driven by the Registrars, the Council is considering a letter to the GAC (draft attached) in
 response to the GAC letter to ICANN CEO.
 
 http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karklins-to-twomey-24apr09.pdf <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karklins-to-twomey-24apr09.pdf> 
 
 The Council response raises issues with which the BC may agree and others with which we may
 not!
 We have therefore indicated at this stage a BC abstention.
 The IPC has done the same.
 
 Do let me know if you have any views.
 
 Philip