[client com] Request for legal advice on Question #9 from ICG

[Greg Shatan]

I support this change.

Greg

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Flanagan, Sharon <sflanagan at sidley.com>
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Highlighted below is a suggested addition to Paragraph 113, Part I of the
> CWG Proposal in response to the ICG request for clarification.
>
> “The function of the PTI Board is to provide oversight of the operations
> of PTI in order to ensure that PTI meets, at a minimum, applicable
> statutory requirements under California public benefit corporation laws
> and, importantly, fulfills its responsibilities under the IANA functions
> contract with ICANN.  If the PTI Board does not fulfill its oversight
> responsibilities with respect to the operations of PTI, the ICANN Board
> will hold the PTI Board accountable by exercising the rights ICANN has as
> the member of PTI and as the counterparty to the IANA functions contract
> with PTI.”
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sharon
>
> *SHARON* *FLANAGAN*
> Partner
>
> *Sidley Austin LLP*
> +1 415 772 1271
> sflanagan at sidley.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info
> <jrobinson at afilias.info>]
> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2015 1:37 PM
> *To:* Gregory, Holly; 'Grace Abuhamad'; 'Client Committee'
> *Subject:* RE: [client com] Request for legal advice on Question #9 from
> ICG
>
>
>
> Holly,
>
>
>
> Thank-you. Agreed about the removal of the comma.
>
>
>
> I think it will be helpful to have clarifying language for the text and if
> you are able to provide that for us, we can use it with confidence. Please
> do so.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> *From:* Gregory, Holly [mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com
> <holly.gregory at sidley.com>]
> *Sent:* 02 October 2015 01:36
> *To:* Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>; Client Committee <
> cwg-client at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [client com] Request for legal advice on Question #9 from
> ICG
>
>
>
> Dear Client Committee and Grace, The draft response provided below is
> appropriate and clear.  (Consider removing the comma after “the ICANN
> Board” in the second sentence.)  Will you also be providing clarifying
> language for the text?  Holly
>
>
>
>
>
> *HOLLY* *GREGORY*
> Partner
>
> *Sidley Austin LLP*
> +1 212 839 5853
> holly.gregory at sidley.com
>
>
>
> *From:* cwg-client-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-client-bounces at icann.org
> <cwg-client-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Grace Abuhamad
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 01, 2015 8:21 PM
> *To:* Client Committee
> *Subject:* [client com] Request for legal advice on Question #9 from ICG
>
>
>
> Dear Sidley,
>
>
>
> The CWG-Stewardship has been working on responses to question from the ICG
> about the proposal. There is one response that was identified on today’s
> call as needing your review and advice.
>
>
>
> *The question:*
>
> *PTI *9) Some comments raise concerns in the context of the proposed PTI
> board composition (mix of ICANN employees and independent directors) that
> the ICANN board and the PTI board could attempt to avoid responsibility for
> any operational shortcomings by each seeking to hold the other board
> responsible. Paragraph 113 in Part 1 indicates that the PTI board will be
> responsible for ensuring that the PTI "fulfills its responsibilities under
> the IANA functions contract with ICANN.” Could the CWG provide an
> unambiguous statement as to which of the two boards will ultimately be held
> accountable for ensuring that the IANA functions are carried out
> appropriately? Please include verbatim text amendments to Part 1 if you
> believe that would be appropriate to clarify this point.
>
> *The draft response: *
>
>
>
> As stated in the CWG-Stewardship proposal, the PTI Board will be
> responsible for ensuring that PTI fulfills its responsibilities under the
> IANA Functions Contract with ICANN. However, should the PTI Board not
> perform its responsibilities, the ICANN Board, will hold the PTI Board
> accountable. As noted in the proposal, as part of the implementation
> process it is anticipated that a contract would be established between PTI
> and ICANN that will grant PTI the rights to act as the IFO, and set out the
> rights and obligations of PTI and ICANN.
>
>
>
>
>
> Please note that I am only sending this note to help with the timing
> (since staff holds the pen on the questions/responses), but please direct
> any questions towards the Client Committee.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Grace
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is
> privileged or confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
> attachments and notify us
> immediately.
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-client mailing list
> Cwg-client at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-client
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-client/attachments/20151005/49f2e848/attachment.html>