[Acct-Legal] agenda ideas for later today

[Greg Shatan]

I would add timeline as an explicit agenda item.

I tend to support putting Sidley more in the lead.  While it would still be
a collaborative process, Sidley has more capacity and is further up the
learning curve.  Adler & Colvin could still play to their strong suit of
highly nuanced advice in the California nonprofit context.

While gathering questions in one place is a good idea, I still caution
against being too caught up on questions.  We need to get the lawyers
closer to our body of work -- lobbing random questions at them without
context or a holistic understanding of the question (much less an idea of
what we intend to accomplish) does not give the lawyers the best chance to
provide guidance.

I will also reiterate the idea of consulting with Jordan and Becky, and
anyone else who is coordinating a work product (Steve DelBianco? Cheryl
Orr?).  The questions really need to come from the work to help advance the
work.  Many of the questions go more to "stress testing" or satisfying
skeptics, as opposed to questions that go directly to the work.

Greg

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:22 PM, McAuley, David <dmcauley at verisign.com>
wrote:

>  Dear legal sub-team members,
>
>
>
> I have a suggested agenda for later today, subject to others thoughts on
> it.
>
>
>
> First, thanks to Alice and Brenda and others who are helping us make this
> happen – and please do send notice as soon as you can.
>
>
>
> Next, I want to note that none of this is meant as criticism of anyone. It
> is simply my attempt to help us organize. It is understandable to me that
> we need a bit more organization as this is complex, the lawyers are new to
> the process, and the timeline is crushing.
>
>
>
> My suggested agenda is threefold:
>
>
>
> 1.       Working with counsel:
>
> 2.       Dealing with questions; and
>
> 3.       Considering holistic approach.
>
>
>
> First, should we consider asking Sidley to be lead counsel, with them to
> get specific California input coordinated between Rosemary (Adler) and
> Sharon (Sidley). I think we are struggling more than we need to with two
> law firms reporting directly to us – I also recognize both are
> exceptional.
>
>
>
> Second, we should, IMO, endeavor to gather all questions and put them in
> one place and give them priority. Just so we have it.
>
>
>
> Third, I like Holly’s holistic suggestion and like the one week idea –
> Rosemary’s overnight mention of two to three weeks concerned me, not
> because of any problem with that assessment but rather due to timeline. I
> realize that conundrum.
>
>
>
> But sometimes law firms “red team” certain things like initial public
> offerings etc and maybe we can get an answer in a week as Holly suggests.
> But to do that we need to be clear in asking for it and to do that I expect
> we would want to run it past CCWG (meaning not until after next Tuesday,
> and maybe not then if we need a second reading). Interested in thoughts
>
>
>
> These are my thoughts now and look forward to meeting again today.
>
>
>
> Thankful we have good lawyers in both firms and for the efforts of this
> team.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>  “This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use
> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain
> information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential and
> exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may be constituted as
> attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> message in error, notify sender immediately and delete this message
> immediately.”
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list
> Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5
>
>


-- 

*Gregory S. Shatan **ï* *Abelman Frayne & Schwab*

*Partner* *| IP | Technology | Media | Internet*

*666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621*

*Direct*  212-885-9253 *| **Main* 212-949-9022

*Fax*  212-949-9190 *|* *Cell *917-816-6428

*gsshatan at lawabel.com <gsshatan at lawabel.com>*

*ICANN-related: gregshatanipc at gmail.com <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>*

*www.lawabel.com <http://www.lawabel.com/>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability5/attachments/20150401/484b5e0e/attachment.html>