[CWG-Stewardship] Draft Scope Document for Legal Counsel

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Hello all,

this has a flavour of the INSO (IANA Names Supporting Organisation) and
INRO (IANA Names Resource Organisation) proposal which I shared a while
ago. That proposal is one of the proposals considered by the ALAC.
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 15/01/2015 14:57, Paul M Kane - CWG wrote:
> The ICA concept and MoU with ICANN provides less opportunity for empire building
> (as its scope can be pre-defined) and also less of a legal target than an
> incorporated Contract Co.
>
> It is more akin to the structure that the RIRs have with the NRO and ICANN,
> which has proven to be fit for purpose.
>
> The goal being to explore all option and give feedback to our respective
> communities as to what has been explored and the best way(s) forward.
>
> Best
>
> Paul
>
> Quoting "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>:
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> In terms of requesting legal advice, how would ICA differ from Contract Co.?
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul M Kane - CWG [mailto:paul.kane-cwg at icb.co.uk] 
>> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 3:40 AM
>> To: Gomes, Chuck
>> Cc: Greg Shatan; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Scope Document for Legal Counsel
>>
>> Thanks Greg
>>
>> May I also suggest a 3rd option..... 
>>
>> I understand Contract Co (but fear it may become far too complicated for a
>> simple task); I understand internal to ICANN (but feat too many functions at
>> a centralised ICANN subject to capture, manipulation with limited ways to
>> guaranteeing quality of service). 
>>
>> May I propose an Internet Community Association (ICA).
>>
>> The ICA could be a light weight, with a specific very limited purpose to
>> award the IANA Root Zone Management MoU to that entity that can best serve
>> technical requirements of the Registry operators (ccTLDs and gTLDs).
>>
>> It is assumed that the current IANA operator will be the first party to be
>> awarded the IANA MoU and should the current operator (ab)use its position to
>> the detriment of one or more Registry Operators (as determined by X (CSC,
>> MRT, external party) then such determination will trigger a process to find a
>> new IANA Root Zone Management.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Paul   
>>
>> Quoting "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>:
>>
>>> It looks pretty good to me Greg.  We could certainly ask more 
>>> questions but I think this is a good start and you left the door open 
>>> for more questions.  If you haven’t already done it, I think you 
>>> should have Sam evaluate whether she thinks it provides enough 
>>> information for us to move forward.  Any potential legal experts will of
>> course of more questions.
>>> The edits I proposed are all very minor.
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>> From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org 
>>> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 6:24 PM
>>> To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
>>> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Draft Scope Document for Legal Counsel
>>>
>>>
>>> All:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attached is a draft scope document intended to refine our request for 
>>> independent legal counsel.  Your comments would be most appreciated at 
>>> the soonest time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html