<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Andrew,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'm copying your email to the Client Committee email list for consideration by Sidley and the Client Committee.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg Shatan</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div><div dir="ltr"><p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#17365d">Gregory S. Shatan </span></b><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#17365d">ï</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#17365d"> </span></b><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#c0504d">Abelman
Frayne & Schwab</span></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#365f91">Partner</span></b><span><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#4f81bd"> </span></b></span><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#4f81bd">| IP |
Technology | Media | Internet</span></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#17365d">666 Third Avenue | New York, NY 10017-5621</span></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Direct</span></b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"> <span> </span></span><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1155cc"><a href="tel:212-885-9253" value="+12128859253" target="_blank">212-885-9253</a><span> </span><b>|<span> </span></b></span><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Main</span></b><span><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"> </span></span><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1155cc"><a href="tel:212-949-9022" value="+12129499022" target="_blank">212-949-9022</a></span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Fax</span></b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"> <span> </span></span><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1155cc"><a href="tel:212-949-9190" value="+12129499190" target="_blank">212-949-9190</a><span> </span><b>|</b><span> </span></span><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">Cell<span> </span></span></b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1155cc"><a href="tel:917-816-6428" value="+19178166428" target="_blank">917-816-6428</a></span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><i><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"><a href="mailto:gsshatan@lawabel.com" target="_blank">gsshatan@lawabel.com</a></span></i></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy">ICANN-related:<span> </span><i><a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a></i></span></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;line-height:12pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><b><i><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy"><a href="http://www.lawabel.com/" target="_blank">www.lawabel.com</a></span></i></b><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif"></span></p></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Andrew Sullivan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 11:04:14AM +0200, Lise Fuhr wrote:<br>
> Please see the attached initial discussion draft of the two models from our legal counsel.<br>
<br>
Thanks for this. I've read it. I have some questions. Questions for<br>
Sidley are listed, and then some observations for our own discussion<br>
(which needn't take up Sidley's time) follow when appropriate in<br>
square brackets.<br>
<br>
In I.A, particularly in numbers 4 and 6, I can't tell whether the<br>
assumption is that there are new agreements between PTI and the RIRs,<br>
and PTI and IETF. I think the fact that PTI is a new legal entity<br>
means that new agreements would be required. Is that correct? [The<br>
reason I ask this is because there is a possible risk of things coming<br>
apart if the other operational communities need to be engaged in a new<br>
negotiation. If PTI just takes the existing agreements and does a<br>
global search and replace for ICANN with PTI, that's nice, but it<br>
doesn't solve everything. For instance, the IETF would have to<br>
publish a new version of RFC 2860. It's worth remembering that every<br>
grievance everyone has with an existing document comes into play once<br>
the document is opened for editing.]<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;display:inline">GSS: As I've noted elsewhere, the RIRs and IETF have 3 options: They can remain under contract with ICANN and ICANN can arrange with PTI to provide the services. Depending on the existing agreements, an amendment to those agreements may or may not be required. Alternatively, ICANN can assign any or all of the agreements to PTI, so that PTI stands in ICANN's shoes in the agreement. Again depending on the existing agreements, the consent of the RIRs</div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
By way of comparison, in II.B, does using Functional Separation permit<br>
ICANN to continue working under its existing MoUs? I'd assume yes,<br>
because AFAIK none of the existing agreements specify the internal<br>
arrangements of how ICANN delivers the service. [Notwithstanding<br>
Milton's point about getting it "right", given the timeline there is a<br>
significant advantage to not having to negotiate, I think, no?]<br>
<br>
III.C talks about CSC. In the case of a full legal separation with<br>
independent governance, would the CSC be needed at all? Presumably<br>
the arrangements between PRI and their customers would be a<br>
contractual one, and as such the management of such contractual<br>
disputes ought to be via those contracts, and not through an extra<br>
body. Or is the point that the way such a contractual arrangement<br>
would solve such disputes ought to be along the lines of the CSC?<br>
<br>
In III.D.2 there is a question about "ultimate accountability over<br>
ICANN's stewardhip". I'm not entirely sure which cases this applies<br>
to. If there is a legal separation, how is this question relevant for<br>
CWG? Under the legal separation described, PTI becomes the new IANA<br>
functions operator. If there's full independent governance of PTI,<br>
for instance, isn't ICANN's stewardship completely gone -- it has only<br>
responsibility for policy, and not for IANA operation at all, right?<br>
Is that part of the point of this question?<br>
<br>
On III.I, I'm not sure what the difference is between CSC and IRP.<br>
Why are both things needed?<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
A<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Andrew Sullivan<br>
<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org" target="_blank">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>