[bc-gnso] ICANN Eliminates Board Meetings at ICANN Meetings

Michael D. Palage michael at palage.com
Tue May 1 15:16:26 UTC 2012

Phil/ Marilyn,


Been there, requested that.  The problem with the MP3 recordings is
redacting them in a timely fashion.  A written transcript strikes the proper
balance, and is totally consistent with that they have done in connection
with their historical  Board meetings held at regional meetings.   This is
an issue I pushed hard during my tenure on the Board.  I used to ask the
Board and the General Counsel to explain the different treatment of
transcriptions for one set of meetings and no transcription for another set
of meetings, no one could give me a straight answer.  You know as an
attorney that is always a good sign for your client/cause. 


I think asking for MP3 is overreach and would just be blown off.  Asking for
a consistent standard based on 10 years of precedent is a much stronger


We have a narrow window in which to act, I think the community getting
behind one standard and requesting action is the best option. 


Marilyn, at least one Board member has indicated that the Board did engage
in consultation with the ACs and SOs.  Could either you or any of the other
elected BC reps share in this consultation/outreach that was undertaken.  I
do not recall this ever being shared/discussed with the full membership.


Best regards,







From: Phil Corwin [mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:54 AM
To: Michael D. Palage; 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] ICANN Eliminates Board Meetings at ICANN Meetings




I understand that some issues have to be discussed in private. But if the
starting point was that all Board meetings were virtually open and closure
was an exception it shouldn't be a big issue to structure meetings so that
matters held in confidence were dealt with at the beginning or end of each


Instead the new default position is that all Board meetings take place
behind closed doors and no transcripts are made available, just condensed
"minutes". This is not transparency.


Fully agree that full transcripts with appropriate redactions should be made
available - but I'd raise you one and also ask that mp3 recordings be made
available, because that would best capture what really went on. And, yes,
those three closed door meetings that took place in San Jose should have
been open to public review - sunlight is the best disinfectant.


Best, Philip


Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal

Virtualaw LLC

1155 F Street, NW

Suite 1050

Washington, DC 20004





Twitter: @VlawDC


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


From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Michael D. Palage
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:26 AM
To: 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] ICANN Eliminates Board Meetings at ICANN Meetings




Having served on the ICANN Board this is not really an option given that
there are some materials that cannot be discussed in public (real time).  


I believe there is a much easier and transparent solution, require the
publication of all transcripts and all supporting documentation with
appropriate redactions by ICANN within 72 hours of the meeting.


We should be asking ourselves the following questions.  There were four
board meeting held in Costa Rica, why are the transcripts from only one of
those meetings now available?


Two of the other meetings held discussed conflicts of interests and the
selection of gTLD providers.  Would anyone that attended the Costa Rica
would have like to sit in on those meetings as oppose to the joke of a
public meeting held on Friday?


Best regards,




P.S. Here are the four Board meetings that were held in Costa Rica:


March 14th
) and
, one on March 15th
and the ten minute joke of a meeting on March 16th



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20120501/28e3b1f6/attachment.html>

More information about the Bc-gnso mailing list