[CWG-Stewardship] Preparing answers on Sidley draft Bylaws questions

Mon Dec 21 22:14:40 UTC 2015

Hi,

Works for me.  Will take a first pass on the ones that apply to the DT I
was involved in.

avri

On 21-Dec-15 14:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> Thanks Grace.
> 
>  
> 
> Chuck
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*Grace Abuhamad [mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org]
> *Sent:* Monday, December 21, 2015 2:37 PM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; Austin, Donna; Avri Doria
> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: Preparing answers on Sidley draft Bylaws questions
> 
>  
> 
> Chuck, I am happy to do whatever is easiest for you. I can help with
> managing/merging documents, as long as there is a redline version for me
> to work from. Since a few questions may need some discussion or
> collaboration among DT leads, it may be helpful to bounce a few ideas
> off-list and then provide a proposed response. We can also help arrange
> a call in the new year if that is more efficient. 
> 
>  
> 
> *From: *"Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com <mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
> *Date: *Monday, December 21, 2015 at 1:26 PM
> *To: *Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org
> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>, "Austin, Donna"
> <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz <mailto:Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>>, Avri Doria
> <doriavr at gmail.com <mailto:doriavr at gmail.com>>
> *Cc: *"cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>"
> <cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
> *Subject: *RE: Preparing answers on Sidley draft Bylaws questions
> 
>  
> 
> Grace – Do you want us to insert our proposed input into the framework
> directly or submit it separately?
> 
>  
> 
> Donna – I note that the two items for DT-M that need responses also
> involve CT-CSC, so I assume that you and I should collaborate on those. 
> I know you are on vacation the rest of this month; should I assume that
> any collaboration we do will need to happen in January?
> 
>  
> 
> Chuck
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*Grace Abuhamad [mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org]
> *Sent:* Monday, December 21, 2015 1:54 PM
> *To:* Gomes, Chuck; Austin, Donna; Avri Doria
> *Cc:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Preparing answers on Sidley draft Bylaws questions
> 
>  
> 
> Dear Donna, Chuck, and Avri
> 
>  
> 
> As the leads of DT-C (CSC), DT-M (Escalation), and DT-N (Reviews), the
> Chairs has asked that you prepare responses to the Sidley Draft Bylaws’
> “Notes to CWG” since these notes affected mainly the work developed by
> your design teams. Some questions are easier to answer than others: some
> questions may require input from the CWG-Stewardship (if, for example,
> the response could be considered policy), others may have dependencies
> on the CCWG-Accountability work. 
> 
>  
> 
> I have updated the draft framework since it’s presentation on 2 December
> to fix page number references and remove the repeated “note to CWG” at
> the beginning of each row. In reviewing this document, there are some
> items where ICANN may be able to provide information or assist with the
> response formulation. If you have specific questions for ICANN staff,
> please let us know. 
> 
>  
> 
> As Lise put in her note below, the primary issue for the 12 January call
> will be the DT-IPR work, but my assumption is that an update on the
> response work may be of interest on that call as well. Please let us
> (staff support) know if there is anything that you need to help you in
> completing this work.
> 
>  
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Grace 
> 
>  
> 
> *From: *<cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Lise Fuhr
> <lise.fuhr at difo.dk <mailto:lise.fuhr at difo.dk>>
> *Date: *Thursday, December 17, 2015 at 7:05 AM
> *To: *"cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>"
> <cwg-stewardship at icann.org <mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
> *Subject: *[CWG-Stewardship] Update on the last item from the CWG call
> 15.12.2015
> 
>  
> 
> Dear CWG,
> 
>  
> 
> At our call on Tuesday we didn’t have time to discuss two issues:
> 
>  
> 
> Under 3. Implementation – creation of PTI, and 4. Bylaws. Below is a
> short description of both issues.
> 
>  
> 
> 3. Implementation – sub bullet “Creation of PTI”
> 
> 
> At our last CWG call (December 3^rd ) we considered Sidley’s role in
> relation to the creation of PTI and the associated legal work (Co
> formation, bylaws, articles etc).
> 
> The client committee discussed this together with Sidley on our call
> December 10^th and, in combination with the direction received in the
> CWG call, we believe the following is an effective approach:
> 
> ·        ICANN to hold the pen and undertake the first pass on the legal
> work (as part of its role in implementation).
> 
> ·        But … ICANN to approach the legal work on the implementation of
> PTI in stages.
> 
> ·        In particular, it is important to seek agreement with CWG /
> Sidley on the key principles before starting the detail drafting phase.
> 
> ·        Thereafter, it will be important for CWG / Sidley to review and
> agree the draft and final forms of the key legal documents
> 
> ·        The CWG will need to see regular updates from ICANN as part of
> this process in order to ensure timely implementation.
> 
>  
> 
> *Action*Staff is to advise ICANN to approach the implementation of PTI
> in stages. In particular, to seek agreement with CWG on the principles
> before starting the drafting phase.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 4. ICANN Bylaws (relating to PTI):
> 
>  
> 
> The client committee had a call on Thursday December 10^th . We
> discussed with Sidley the request to simplify their draft of the bylaws.
> 
> Sidley suggested at the call, that instead of simplifying Bylaws at the
> outset, the CWG could work on the questions previously posed by Sidley
> and then Sidley could most effectively recommend what needs to be in the
> Bylaws and what can be implemented as supplements e.g. as 'policies' to
> be included elsewhere.
> 
>  
> 
> The co-chairs therefore propose to form a small group to manage dealing
> with the questions in the first instance in order to inform Sidley’s
> restructuring of their draft. The group to be composed of the leads of
> DTs that most closely associated with the questions asked by Sidley. We
> suggest Chuck, Donna, Avri to be the members of this small group.
> 
>  
> 
> Grace was to have shared the framework for answering the questions that
> was previously prepared by staff. However, it was held back while we
> discussed the best approach. You will receive these shortly.
> 
>  
> 
> This means:
> 
> ·        That Sidley are on stand-by in relation to the ICANN Bylaws
> work until the CWG has sorted out the questions asked by Sidley in the
> bylaws document.
> 
> ·        Unless we hear any objections we will task Chuck, Avri and
> Donna to form some answers to be reviewed by the CWG.
> 
> ·        Then CWG will get back to Sidley with the answers in order for
> Sidley to rework the bylaws.
> 
>  
> 
> AOB
> 
>  
> 
> Next call is the 12^th of January at 16 UTC, where one of the issues
> will be the discussion of the IPR document drafted by the DT IPR. It is
> important that the CWG have a proper look at the IPR document, in
> particular the key questions / decision points raised in it before the
> next CWG meeting and ideally submit any comments by email before the
> next call.
> 
>  
> 
> Happy holidays to all,
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Jonathan and Lise
> 

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus