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

[Brenda Brewer]

Hello Chuck,

 

The document you request can be found on the Wiki page:  https://community.icann.org/x/7ArxAg

 

Kind regards,

Brenda

 

 

 

From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes at verisign.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 12:39 PM
To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>; Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>; Avri Doria
<doriavr at gmail.com>; Brenda Brewer <brenda.brewer at icann.org>
Cc: cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: RE: Preparing answers on Sidley draft Bylaws questions 
Importance: High

 

Can someone provide me the version of the updated version of the Sidley Draft Bylaws that Grace
updated.  I think the version I have is the original.

 

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 3rd) 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 10th 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 10th . 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 12th 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160106/91bbe8d0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160106/91bbe8d0/smime-0001.p7s>