[client com] Fwd: [CWG-Stewardship] Sidley Austin LLP

[Greg Shatan]

Holly and all,

I wanted to bring to your attention a few recent responses to the
announcement of Sidley's retention and the circulation of the engagement
letter.  You may wish to consider a response, or at least an
acknowledgement of the concern.  I am free from 12:30-1 if you would like
to discuss.

Greg

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Poole <jp1 at expri.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Sidley Austin LLP
To: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>


Jonathan:
I find this very troubling. ICANN is the client. Specifically,
CWG-Stewardship is NOT the client, so what good is Sidley Austin's advice?
Sidley Austin owes CWG-Stewardship none of the duties required of attorneys
to clients under the California Code of Professional Responsibility. This
is not what I understood CWG-Stewardship was getting, and I feel
CWG-Stewardship has been intentionally misled. For all intents and
purposes, ICANN could have made the same arrangements with Jones Day as
they did with Sidley Austin, and saved us the time and trouble. Has anyone
on the Client Committee reviewed independently the California Code of
Professional Conduct and sought the opinion of a qualified non-interested
California Attorney before agreeing to this? There are serious
ramifications as to who is the named "client"--including the duty of
loyalty--of which ICANN legal staff and Sidley Austin are fully aware. When
did the Client Committee agree that the client for our "independent legal
counsel" would be ICANN? Why was that not disclosed until now to all
members and participants of CWG-Stewardship? Jonathan, is this what you
mean by "good faith?" Let me make this plain for everyone--what the Client
Committee has obtained is "ICANN outside Legal Counsel" for our use, but
NOT Independent Legal Counsel--"Independent" means "independent of ICANN."
Now I understand why ICANN legal staff and Jones Day have been intimately
involved in the Client Committee process while members and participants of
CWG-Stewardship were intentionally kept in the dark. This is not "good
faith"--this reeks of "bad faith." -- John Poole

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Jonathan Robinson <
jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com> wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> You may find the attached a more easily digestible summary of key terms.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> *From:* Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
> *Sent:* 09 March 2015 21:06
> *To:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org
> *Subject:* RE: Sidley Austin LLP
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Please see attached for the executed engagement letter with Sidley Austin.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> *From:* Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info
> <jrobinson at afilias.info>]
> *Sent:* 08 March 2015 21:46
> *To:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org
> *Subject:* Sidley Austin LLP
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> As of Friday 6 March, the CWG-Stewardship has engaged Sidley Austin LLP to
> advise and consult on the CWG’s development of a transition proposal.
>
>
>
> In the past two weeks, the Client Committee shortlisted three firms,
> interviewed each of them, and retained one. We chose to retain Sidley
> primarily because they envisaged the engagement as consultation rather than
> pure advice. In addition, Sidley presented a strong governance focus as
> well as specific experience with the U.S. political environment (including
> a former Congressman and a former Department of Commerce appointee).
>
>
>
> Sidley is aware of the CWG’s tight timeframe and accepts the requirement
> for highly transparent work methods. Also, the client relationship has been
> clearly defined and emphasized in the retention letter in that *ICANN has
> instructed Sidley to take direction exclusively from and provide advice and
> consultation exclusively to the CWG, primarily through the CWG’s Client
> Committee*.
>
>
>
> Sidley has no previous client relationship with ICANN. No conflicts were
> identified, however please note that Greg Shatan and Holly Gregory from
> Sidley worked at the same firm over a decade ago.
>
>
>
> The Client Committee will meet with Sidley Austin on Monday. This call
> will be recorded and transcribed and we will then provide an update to the
> CWG on Tuesday’s call, where we also plan to introduce the Sidley team to
> the CWG.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan & Lise
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
>

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-client/attachments/20150310/2709de8a/attachment.html>