[CWG-Stewardship] [client com] Draft: Summary of Legal Structure for CWG Proposal

[Eduardo Diaz]

Milton:

I am not implying that we should or not be concerned about the potential costs
associated with separating out the department. I am saying that
the statements are subjective. *F**airly minima*l and *not be significant *are
not really defined. For example, *fairly minimal* for some may be nothing
and *not be significant* (in relation to cost) for others might mean 1% of
ICANN's total budget.  Who knows?

Thanks for the suggestion proposed in your comparison example. That is
exactly what we need: real data that will support the f*airly minima*l and *not
be significant *statements.

-ed



On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  Hello Eduardo:
>
> Can you identify any objective reasons why we should be extremely
> concerned about the potential costs associated with separating out a
> department that consists of only 7 people (even less, if it’s only the
> “names-related part) with no heavy, specialized capital equipment?
>
>
>
> How would the cost of these legal formalities and minor asset reshufflings
> compare to the cost of sending ICANN’s CEO and assistants to the World
> Economic Forum for a week? How would it compare to the costs of running 42
> conference calls for the CWG over the course of 8 months, with 3-5 staff
> members present on each call? Within those parameters, I would suggest that
> the term “not that significant” or “fairly minimal” is not so subjective or
> arbitrary.
>
>
>
> I am not arguing against Chuck’s suggestion that ICANN accounting develop
> an estimate (and it will be an estimate, not a measurement). More
> information can be useful. But we do have objective knowledge of the size
> of the IANA functions operation and in the greater scheme of things I think
> these costs are going to look pretty darn small once those estimates are
> developed.
>
>
>
> Let’s also not forget the potential security advantages of separating IANA
> functions infrastructure from routine, unrelated ICANN stuff. There could
> be significant reductions of risk, and thus cost, there.
>
>
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> *From:* cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Eduardo Diaz
>
>   I am not suggesting that we do not accept counsel's advice but to
> adjust what I consider subjective statements. *"fairly minimal *and* not
> be significant"* need to be defined to make them objective. Based on my
> business experience also cost is always impredecible especially when you do
> not have all the details.
>
>
>
> -ed
>
>
>



-- 
*NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or
subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named
addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use,
disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by
mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150420/81fbab83/attachment.html>