Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Oct 26 11:56:47 UTC 2018

Sorry for the delay in sending this, but the last days of the ICANN meeting were rather hectic.

To be clear, the ALAC position (supported by 11 members with 1 objection and three members not voting) was to support use of the Auction Proceeds to replenish the reserve. The ALAC did qualify that with a caveate to use no more than 25% of available auction funds in this way. So if the .web funds are excluded, the Board action was in excess of the that specified by the ALAC statement, and if .web is factored in, it was well below.


At 24/10/2018 05:34 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:

Let me provide a different voice here.

First, as disclosure, the BC, where I am a member, supported the possibility of using some of the Auction Funds for replenishing the Reserve Fund.  And, I was a co drafter and proponent of that BC position.  That information is public as I am shown as a co drafter of the BC positions. We were not alone in supporting that possibility, so it is not fair to say that none of the community supported that use of some of the auction funds. BUT only approx. /roughly just under 50% will come from the Auction Funds, and the rest [close to the same amount] from ICANN org budget...

Secondly, I am not sure why anyone would propose using funds that are related to a lawsuit. Any attorney worth his/her degree and any business executive would fall over laughing about the legal issues...

However, I think the reference was to the funds reserved for other litigation about new gTLDs, Judith, not the .web funds. But Daniel can offer his own clarification.

Ultimately, all of us care most about the stability of the organization and while we may have small differences in some areas,. ,and larger differences in others, first and foremost, the world is dependent not on how many grants we make, but on the stability of the organization. For now, that means a reserve fund which is about the entire organization.

I prefer to go back to work and quickly advance the public comments about the "models" and then try to advance toward an implementation process/develoment.

I don't mean this to sound as negative as it may sound -- but if we get diverted away from our own work, we will deny the benefit of the $100M which can do a lot of good, once we get a mechanism and then an implementation program in place.

I suspect that a lot of good can be done with $100M, and we haven't even shown that we know how to manage that level of available funds. And if the .web funds become available that is another $130M+.

This is only my view.  And I hope you will not think that I am looking for a debate. I am not. I will listen, but my purpose in posting was merely to note that if all of us read all the submissions on replenishment of the Reserve Fund and follow the Budget comments, there has been support for tapping some of the Auction Funds, as well as some who objected.

I personally respect that the Board is taking this step  and at this time.

Marilyn Cade

From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith at jhellerstein.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:22 PM
To: ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org

HI Erika,

Yes.  Like Daniel and Elliott, I do not understand why they cannot use some of the money that was set aside from the .web auction to refill the coffers. If the line was that we are just replenishing what was lost during the IANA Transition than why not take if from the .web money that was set aside. If for some reason they may find that they need all that money than possibly that could be revisited. I also am interested in learning an answer to Daniel's question


Judith Hellerstein

Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139  Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
Judith at jhellerstein.com<mailto:Judith at jhellerstein.com>

Linked In:

Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide

On 10/24/2018 3:52 PM, Elliot Noss wrote:
I find myself terribly angry about this. It makes no sense both because of Daniel’s comment below and because there are other ways towards this. I don’t know that that matters.


On Oct 24, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Daniel Dardailler <danield at w3.org<mailto:danield at w3.org>> wrote:

If the board decides to take funding off the Auction benefits pot, that's their right (and maybe obligation I gather) but I think they should at least explain why the ~100M set aside for potential legal costs wrt new gTLD was not used instead.

>From the beginning the Auction benefits were labelled as "not for ICANN budget" and replenishing a reserve is clearly a budgetary action, so I'm interested in understanding which constraints on the 100M legal provision mentioned above has been evaluated as stronger that something as clear as the "not for ICANN budget" attached to the Auctions.

I'm not trying to revert this ICANN's board decision, I just want to be able to explain the decision made to outsiders.


On 2018-10-24 13:20, Erika Mann wrote:
*Dear CCWG AP colleagues - *
*Cherine Chalaby asked for a meeting this morning, October 24, to inform me
as CCWG AP Co-Chair about a resolution the Board will pass tomorrow
morning, October 25, concerning the replenishment of the Reserve Fund.
Maarten Botterman attended the meeting and Chris Disspain was present for a
short period at the beginning of the meeting.*
*To replenish the Reserve Fund, the Board resolution will request a
contribution from ICANN ORG on an annual basis (8 years), total $32
Million, and an immediate contribution from Auction Proceed, total $36
Million. These two amounts seen together would replenish the Reserve Fund
(in 8 years) to the agreed height. *
*Cherine was interested in informing us ahead of the decision and I
mentioned, that we were expecting such a move and, as far as this is
concerned, we're not surprised to see the Board passing this resolution
tomorrow and that we do appreciate his approach in informing us ahead of
passing the resolution. *
Reminder:* The* '*Document for Public comment – Replenishment Strategy for
the ICANN Reserve Fund' (open date, March 6th, 2018/closed April 25th,
2018) mentioned the following about the replenishment of the fund in
relation to the topics mentioned above: *
* https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-reserve-fund-replenishment-strategy-06mar18-en.pdf<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fen%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Ffiles%2Fproposed-reserve-fund-replenishment-strategy-06mar18-en.pdf&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb3b8dad9cce6483e936e08d639ee872e%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636760093959036424&sdata=IpmPMTwYEt%2Fsf0gqjTFqVNPexlcy1fE6Rv5d7Ukeup4%3D&reserved=0>
< https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-reserve-fund-replenishment-strategy-06mar18-en.pdf >*
*§ Contribution from ICANN Org: Future adopted budgets could be made to
provide a contribution to the Reserve Fund on an annual basis. This would
require ICANN Org to plan each fiscal year for expenses to be lower than
funding by an amount explicitly designated for the purpose of replenishing
the Reserve Fund. Given ICANN’s funding constraints, contributions from
ICANN org to the Reserve Fund replenishment result from a reduced
allocation of ICANN’s resources to its on-going activities, in order to
produce a surplus that is allocated to the Reserve Fund. Such allocation is
and needs to continue being the subject of community engagement and input. *
*§ Auction Proceeds: ICANN currently has US$ 104 million collected from
auctions that were held as the mechanism of last resort to resolve string
contention in the new gTLD program (including investment returns). This
amount excludes US$ 132 million relating to the auction of the .WEB string
net of auction fees *
*Kind regards, *
*Erika *
*Barcelona, October 24, 2018*
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>

Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list

Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>


Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20181026/070ebd4f/attachment.html>

More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list