<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>Avri and everyone,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the letter.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this list.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Cheers</DIV>
<DIV>Mary</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#800080>Mary W S Wong</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV>Professor of Law</DIV>
<DIV>Franklin Pierce Law Center</DIV>
<DIV>Two White Street</DIV>
<DIV>Concord, NH 03301</DIV>
<DIV>USA</DIV>
<DIV>Email: <A href="mailto:mwong@piercelaw.edu">mwong@piercelaw.edu</A></DIV>
<DIV>Phone: 1-603-513-5143</DIV>
<DIV>Webpage: <A href="http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php">http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php</A></DIV>
<DIV>Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: <A href="http://ssrn.com/author=437584">http://ssrn.com/author=437584</A></DIV><BR><BR>>>> Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>><BR><BR>sure thing.<BR><BR>I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth <BR>sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know <BR>if this assumption is in error in the next few hours.<BR><BR>thanks<BR><BR>a.<BR><BR>Dear Janis,<BR><BR>Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in <BR>response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This <BR>communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted <BR>abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency, Internet <BR>Service Providers and Connectivity Providers<BR>Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary Wong, as an <BR>active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), <BR>felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent <BR>with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained.<BR><BR>Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment <BR>at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue <BR>with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.<BR><BR>Best Regards,<BR>On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:<BR><BR>><BR>> Avri<BR>><BR>> Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO <BR>> there's<BR>> been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency <BR>> and as<BR>> a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.<BR>><BR>> In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have <BR>> expressed<BR>> there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have <BR>> to offer<BR>> a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should <BR>> be left<BR>> to the Board.<BR>><BR>> Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor <BR>> amendment<BR>> that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers<BR>> Constituency to the abstention.<BR>><BR>> Regards<BR>><BR>> Tony<BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org <BR>> ] On<BR>> Behalf Of Avri Doria<BR>> Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13<BR>> To: Council GNSO<BR>> Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC<BR>><BR>><BR>> I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today. I would<BR>> especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC,<BR>> Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included on<BR>> your abstentions.<BR>><BR>> ---<BR>><BR>> Dear Janis,<BR>><BR>> Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in<BR>> response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This<BR>> communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted<BR>> abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally<BR>> both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the<BR>> Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this<BR>> document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part of<BR>> the IRT and have also abstained.<BR>><BR>> Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment<BR>> at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue<BR>> with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.<BR>><BR>> Best Regards,<BR>><BR>> --<BR>><BR>> The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the<BR>> letter with changes accepted and date updated.<BR>><BR>> thanks<BR>><BR>> a.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>