[CWG-Stewardship] Concern with Contract Co.
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon Dec 1 15:38:00 UTC 2014
I guess it is all in the reading. When you
combine the section I identified (and others) and
the "mix and match" process it was there from my sperspective. Alan
At 01/12/2014 01:35 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
>Alan:
>
>Strawman 1 was not an "internal to ICANN"
>proposal. The part that you quote refers to the
>IANA Functions Operator remaining ICANN. That
>does not make it an internal to ICANN
>approach. The current proposal also leaves
>ICANN as the IANA Functions Operator. By that
>measure, the current proposal is just as much "internal to ICANN."
>
>An "internal to ICANN" approach would be one
>where there was no external entity (legal or
>otherwise involved) and oversight,
>accountability and all of the other roles
>currently performed by NTIA are performed by bodies internal to ICANN.
>
>You go on to say that there was "clearly no
>other entity holding the contract." This is
>incorrect. I draw your attention to the section
>"Documentation to Replace NTIA Contract," which reads:
>
>Service Level Agreement. The OPRC and ICANN
>will enter into a Service Level Agreement for
>the performance of the technical and
>administrative IANA functions. The SLA would
>run for an initial term of three years and would
>be renewed upon the agreement of the OPRC and the IANA Functions Operator.
>
>A "Service Level Agreement" is a form of
>contract -- so there is clearly a contract. And
>it states that the "OPRC and ICANN will enter
>into" this contact. So there is clearly an
>"other entity" holding the contract.
>
>You also state that the OPRC is an "internal
>committee." This is also incorrect. The section
>on legal status of OPRC states "Legal
>Status. The OPRC will be a committee rather
>than a separate incorporated entity. [The
>committee may be considered an âunincorporated
>association,â and will be domiciled in
>[California or the U.S. or Switzerland or some
>other place] to the extent that the committee
>has a legal identity.]." Nowhere does this
>state or even imply that the OPRC is an ICANN
>Committee. Indeed the fact that there is a
>discussion of domicile and that OPRC will enter
>into an agreement with ICANN can only lead to
>the conclusion that the OPRC is external ICANN.
>
>I stand by my earlier statement -- I don't think
>an "internal to ICANN" proposal was ever put on
>the table within the group prior to Frankfurt in
>any kind of tangible, concrete fashion.
>
>Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Alan Greenberg
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>I have to disagree.
>
>>Strawman Proposal 1
>>
>>4 Status of IANA Functions Operator
>>
>>a Division of ICANN. The IANA Functions
>>Operator will remain a division of ICANN.
>>
>>b Enhanced Separability. ICANN will maintain
>>the current separation between ICANN and IANA,
>>and will make the IANA Functions Operator more
>>easily separable from ICANN, if separation
>>becomes necessary at some future time.
>
>There was a "Review Committee" but clearly no
>other entity holding the contract. Strawman 1
>did, nonsensically, posit that the internal
>committee could initiate an RFP. for a "new"
>operator, but this too confirmed the the "old" operator was ICANN.
>
>The references to an oversight "mechanism" also
>alluded to something other than an external contract-holding entity.
>
>Alan
>
>At 30/11/2014 01:50 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>Frankly, I don't think an "internal to ICANN"
>>proposal was ever put on the table within the
>>group prior to Frankfurt in any kind of tangible, concrete fashion.
>
>
>
>
>--
>
>Gregory S. Shatan ï Abelman Frayne & Schwab
>
>666 Third Avenue ï New York, NY 10017-5621
>
>Direct 212-885-9253 | Main 212-949-9022
>
>Fax 212-949-9190 | Cell 917-816-6428
>
><mailto:gsshatan at lawabel.com>gsshatan at lawabel.com
>
>ICANN-related: <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>
>www.lawabel.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141201/846f9186/attachment.html>
More information about the CWG-Stewardship
mailing list