[Acct-Legal] April 23-24 intensive work days and outstanding requests

Wed Apr 15 05:34:09 UTC 2015

Yes, thanks.  Talk to you tomorrow, for the second hour of the Legal Subteam call.

We look forward to seeing the schedule for the intensive days.

Rosemary

From: ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:31 PM
To: ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Acct-Legal] April 23-24 intensive work days and outstanding requests

Thanks Greg,

Yes. We can discuss this tomorrow in our call and yes I agree with what you’ve replied to Rosemary.

Rosemary,

I apologize for the lack of clearness by mentioning “our” rather than specifying to which calls I referred to. The general rule should be to have you in all Legal Sub-team calls, regular CCWG calls and only on request on any other calls of sub-groups.

With regards to the intensive session, the agenda should be ready shortly so we will then be able to determine to which calls we consider you should attend.

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

León

El 15/04/2015, a las 0:04, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>> escribió:

I suggest we discuss this on tomorrow's Legal Sub Team call.  We don't want to overlawyer this by having lawyers on every meeting of every subgroup and CCWG call.  We also don't want to stretch the lawyers too thin, or have their time taken by being on calls when they need to be working on deliverables.  I recognize that ne firm or the other could put one person on each call to monitor and report back to the legal team, which is somewhat less resource-intense, but we still need to decide what we're doing.

With regard to the 2 day intensive, I think the agenda should be developed as soon as possible and then it should be determined which sessions need legal counsel present and participating.  It may be that some sessions are not legal in nature, others will have legal taking the lead, and still others will fall in the middle.  We should identify those ASAP.  We did this with our 2-day intensive in the CWG, and I think it worked reasonably well.

Finally, I think the only calls where we expect counsel to be present unquestioningly are the Legal Subteam calls.

Greg Shatan

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 12:04 AM, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>> wrote:
Dear León:

I wasn’t asking about the regular calls;  I was asking about the April 23-24 intensive work days (see subject line; I should have put it in the body of the message, to be clearer).  Do you want legal counsel from both firms on the 12 hours of calls during that 2-day period?

As to “our regular” calls, I also need clarification as to what you mean by “our”.  As far as I know, there is a Legal Subteam call every Wednesday, for which you want counsel on for the second hour.  In addition, I believe you’ve said we should be observing the [regular?] CCWG calls on Tuesdays.

Are there other CCWG calls we should be attending?  (Does “our” mean just Legal Subteam, or CCWG?)

And should we also be planning to attend the WP1 calls, which I don’t think from seeing the schedule can be described as “regular”?  Jordan has asked us, as of this evening, to attend tomorrow’s WP1call for an hour, and we will attempt to cover it, although I personally am only available for half that time.

In short, when you say “our calls,” I’m unsure if that refers to the Legal Subteam only, to the full CCWG also, or encompasses various subgroups within CCWG, including WP1, that have separate calls.

Perhaps I should have figured this out by now, so forgive me if I’m being a bit dense.

Rosemary

From: ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:45 PM
To: ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Acct-Legal] April 23-24 intensive work days and outstanding requests

Dear Rosemary,

Thank you for the excellent presentation You, Holly and the rest of the team delivered. It was very useful and will, of course, spark new discussions and need for clarification in many points that I intend to highlight in our call tomorrow.

As for the expectation of your participation in our regular calls, as we have consistently suggested, we expect you can join the calls on a regular basis to be able to follow the discussion of the wider group but not really participate actively in each and every call unless requested or when deem appropriate.

It is, of course, not necessary to have all your team in each call but would be useful to have someone from either firm attending so that person can in turn update the larger team in the way you have agreed to interact.

With regards to reviewing the questions that might be obsolete or with lesser priority, you are right. This is something we will need to review and provide further guidance to you accordingly.

I hope this is useful and talk to you soon.

Best regards,

León

El 14/04/2015, a las 9:41, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>> escribió:

Leon:

I hope the presentation was helpful.

From today’s meeting, I was not sure what involvement you expect from legal counsel for these meetings, but my ability to participate will be spotty, depending on the exact times of calls, due to pre-existing and immovable commitments.  Other members of the A&C team may be available, though.  Please share your expectations with respect to your need for our presence and nature of participation.

In the meantime, I presume legal counsel will coordinate and continue to work through the outstanding official requests for counsel input.  I expect we should anticipate some new requests coming out of the presentation; please prioritize them into our queue.  (We haven’t discussed the possibility of cancelling requests, but it seems possible that some requests may be obsolete as a result of intervening events, or at least their priority may fall.  We will not make that judgment, of course, but you might consider it.)

Rosemary
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list
Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list
Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list
Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability5/attachments/20150415/8e35cb74/attachment-0001.html>