<div dir="ltr"><div><div>Dear Council colleagues,<br><br></div><div>Below for your information is a copy of a letter sent on behalf of the NCSG to the Board of Directors, which was received by the Board (via Bruce Tonkin's kind intercession) on 19 June. <br>
<br></div><div>Bruce says the Board would be interested to meet and discuss the broad concerns about the multistakeholder model raised in the reconsideration request, and also confirms that the request itself will be discussed at the BGC meeting of 25 June. <br>
<br></div><div>If and when we have any scheduling information about a meeting with the Board, we will share it so that others may be aware. <br></div><div><br></div><div>All the best,<br><br></div><div>Maria<br></div><div>
<br>Dear ICANN Board of Directors:</div><div><br></div><div>I am
writing to you on behalf of the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG)
and other concerned members of the ICANN community regarding the harmful
implications to the community-led multi-stakeholder policy development
model if the ICANN Board decides to adopt the rationale provided in the
recommendation of the Board Governance Committee (BGC) in response to
the NCSG's Request for Reconsideration (13-3). The rationale provided
in the BGC's recommendation, which appears to be drafted by
over-reaching lawyers, attempts to set a precedent that ICANN staff can
over-rule the GNSO Council on policy decisions at its own discretion.
This decision has alarmed community members beyond the NCSG and beyond
those who were originally concerned with the underlying issue that NCSG
was initially probing of staff's adoption of the "TM+50" policy for the
Trademark Clearinghouse. </div><div><br></div><div>The GNSO Council
expressed concern about the BGC decision rationale at length during
council's 13 June meeting; and I encourage all Board Members to listen
to <a href="http://t.co/ss2MwpdWEa" target="_blank">audio recording</a> of
the GNSO Council discussion or read the attached transcript to get a
better understanding the concerns of members of several different GNSO
stakeholder groups. </div><div><br></div><div>The rationale provided in
the BGC decision, if adopted by the entire board, would cement the
change in ICANN's policy development model away from the bottom-up
community-led governance model to a top-down staff-driven model with no
checks on abuses or poor staff decisions. If the rationale provided in
this BGC decision is adopted by the Board, which goes well beyond the
narrow issue presented to it, ICANN threatens to undermine its own
legitimacy as a global governance institution, and it loses the ability
to label itself as a community-led bottom-up model for Internet
governance.</div><div><br></div><div>We understand the BGC's
recommendation is on the agenda to be adopted on 25 June 2013 by the
Board's New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC). Given the Board's record of
adopting all 15 BGC decisions that have come before it in the last ten
years, there is concern that this BGC recommendation will be similarly
adopted by the Board with little understanding or discussion of the harm
to ICANN's legitimacy and the multi-stakeholder model that this
precedent threatens. The handling of this reconsideration request has
also raised concerns about ICANN's "accountability" mechanism, which
appears to allow the same legal team that created and adopted a policy
to later evaluate the legitimacy of that policy's adoption.</div><div><br></div><div><b><i>We
therefore respectfully request that the Board meet with concerned
members of the community including NCSG to permit a more complete
discussion and understanding of the concerns raised by the rationale
provided in the BGC decision and to allow for appropriate adjustments to
the decision before it is adopted by the Board.</i></b> We would
gladly meet with the Members of the ICANN Board during the Durban
Meeting or before, at the Board's convenience, to discuss this decision
and welcome all members of the community to join in the discussion.
Please let us know if the Board is available to meet with NCSG and
others in the community on this crucial issue at your earliest
convenience. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to
fruitful discussions going into Durban and stand ready to provide
whatever assistance is needed.</div><div><br></div><div>Truly,</div><div><span class="">Robin</span> Gross</div><div>NCSG Chair</div></div></div>