[Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC

Tue Nov 25 18:34:15 UTC 2014

Dear colleagues,

I understand the benefit to use the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP as a test case for GAC-GNSO collaboration, where views of both constituencies are different but as Manal rightly pointed out early engagement and the handling of simultaneous PDPs in terms of prioritization and streamlining will not be testing and they  should be on the top of a "pilot" in my humble opinion.

Nevertheless, the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP can also work as a "pilot" to foster GAC-GNSO collaboration, which will be very helpful if we want to move on. So, it would work for me as a "2nd best".

And as before stated for the ICANN London meeting, I'm more than in favor to a face-to-face meeting (and during lunch time could work better - as Manal suggested each one could grab something to eat in the room allocated for such meeting) to better discuss how to move on, in particular on early engagement and the handling of simultaneous PDPs.

Best,

Ana

Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves vcard<http://www.umic.pt/vcard/an_dsi.vcf>
Director
Department of Information Society
FCT  Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
              MINISTÉRIO DA EDUCAÇÃO E CIÊNCIA
Av. D. Carlos I, 126 - 1º andar
1249-074 Lisboa
Tel: +351 213 911 555/6 - +351 213 924 300 (geral)
Fax: +351 213 956 519
Email: ana.neves at fct.pt<mailto:margarida.ribeiro at fct.pt>                       http://www.fct.pt<http://www.fct.pt/>

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mason Cole
Sent: segunda-feira, 24 de Novembro de 2014 01:26
To: Manal Ismail
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org; gnso-secs at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC

Thanks Manal.  I too look forward to hearing from others in the CG.

Mason

On Nov 23, 2014, at 1:35 AM, Manal Ismail wrote:

Many thanks Brian and Mason for sharing your thoughts ..
I fully agree with Brian that we should not continue discussing early engagement in the abstract only and fully agree that the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP may be a good case to test engagement and collaboration between the GAC and GNSO .. But I also note that this will not be testing neither EARLY engagement nor the handling of simultaneous PDPs in terms of prioritization and streamlining .. However, we can still do and benefit from both:
-          Use the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP as a test case for GAC-GNSO collaboration, where views of both constituencies are different
-          Agree on a mechanism (quick-look, Triage committee, ...etc) that would change the pattern of GAC engagement, maximizing it at the earliest stages
I can see an important and different role for Mason to play in both .. It's also good to know that you agree that there may be instances where the GNSO might know upfront that GAC input would be necessary ..

I do apologize for the delay in coming back with the name of a counterpart for Mason from the GAC side .. As mentioned earlier, Olof and I have already conveyed this request to the GAC leadership but have not yet heard back from them .. As you all know, too many important and urgent things are ongoing simultaneously .. I will send them a reminder and hope to get back to you soonest .. Meanwhile if you already know GAC colleagues who are interested it would be good to know who they are .. I can also cc them on my reminder to the GAC leadership ..

I fully agree to having a face-to-face in Singapore .. and yes, we can try an informal meeting over lunch this time .. A 6:30 pm meeting on the Sun. did not find much participants in London .. We can also try to keep it simple and flexible .. One option may be that each one grabs his/her lunch and we gather in a room allocated for our meeting ..

Looking forward to hearing views of other colleagues ..

Kind Regards
--Manal

From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mason Cole
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 2:04 AM
To: Brian Winterfeldt
Cc: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>; gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Groupteleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC

Brian --

Many thanks for this note.  Very helpful.

Speaking in my capacity as liaison, let me give a short update:  I've been in touch with several GAC members interested in the subject of curative rights mechanisms for IGOs/INGOs (as I was directed by the council to do) and am seeking the clarification the council is looking for.  You're right that it's a good test case, though please note not EXACTLY one, as my involvement has started well after the PDP commenced.  I anticipate that for future PDPs, I will contact the GAC at the issues report phase, or otherwise as early as possible.

It would be tremendously beneficial for me to have someone in the GAC with whom I could interface day-to-day.  If you know of interested persons, I'm very happy to speak with them.

I think a face-to-face in Singapore would be a very productive use of time.  Thanks for suggesting it.

Best --

Mason

On Nov 21, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Winterfeldt, Brian J. wrote:

Dear All,

I want to take this opportunity to share a few thoughts on our ongoing discussions.  I agree that we cannot and should not continue to discuss early engagement in the abstract only.  In addition, I agree that there is room for the GNSO to take on a more proactive role in early engagement of the GAC.  A clearly defined set of triggers on the GNSO side is certainly a possibility.  While it is true that the GNSO would not want to decide for the GAC in all cases whether an issue is deserving of the GAC's attention, there will most certainly be instances where the GNSO might know upfront that GAC input would be necessary, such as issues on which the GAC has provided advice in the past and issues that unambiguously relate to treaties or national laws.

By way of example, discussion arose during the November 13, 2014 GNSO Council meeting concerning the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP Working Group Letter sent to Mason as GNSO Liaison to GAC.  In the letter, the WG is proactively seeking Mason's assistance in engaging the GAC on certain issues raised by the GAC's Los Angeles Communiqué, namely, discrepancies between the GAC advice and the directives contained in the Working Group Charter.  As I understand it, Mason is awaiting further instruction on how to proceed.  This seems to me to be a great opportunity to refine and test the mechanisms we have been discussing for engagement and collaboration between the GAC and GNSO.

In addition, there is one item that we did not discuss during the call this week but that I believe we should revisit - a GAC point person to serve as Mason's counterpart for day-to-day coordination.  I may know one or two people who may be interested.

In terms of planning for Singapore, I think it would be beneficial to have a face-to-face meeting of this group, perhaps in an informal setting over lunch.  We can invite other members of our constituent groups along in an effort to generate greater support for the work of the CG.  In a smaller, interactive setting, we may be able pinpoint more precisely the type and amount of information necessary for effective collaboration.  I would be happy to reach out to Glen offline to determine the feasibility of planning the lunch.

Thank you in advance for your consideration.  I welcome your feedback on the above items.

Best regards,

Brian

Brian J. Winterfeldt
Head of Internet Practice
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118
p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244

575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585
p / (212) 940.6762  f / (212) 894.5585
brian.winterfeldt at kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt at kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/>

________________________________
From: gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.orgOn<mailto:gac-gnso-cg-bounces at icann.orgOn> Behalf OfTerri Agnew
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 5:34:26 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
To: gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org>
Subject: [Gac-gnso-cg] MP3 recording GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference Tuesday 18 November 2014 1400 UTC
Dear All,

Please find the MP3 recording of the GAC / GNSO Consultation Group teleconference held on Tuesday 18 November 2014 at 1400 UTC at:
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-gac-20141118-en.mp3
 On page:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov

 The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

Attendees:

Government Advisory Committee
Manal Ismail - co-chair - Egypt
Ana Neves, Portugal

GNSO Council
Brian Winterfeldt, Councilor
David Cake, Vice Chair

GNSO Liaison to the GAC:
Mason Cole

Apology:
Amr Elsadr, Councilor
Suzanne Radell, US
Avri Doria, Councillor
Jonathan Robinson, Chair

ICANN Staff:
Marika Konings
Olof Nordling
Glen de Saint Gery
Karine Perset
Nathalie Peregrine

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **
Public archives of the mailing list can be found at:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/

Thank you.
Kind regards,

Nathalie

Adobe Chat transcript:
   Marika Konings:Welcome to the GAC-GNSO CG meeting of 18 November 2014
  Nathalie  Peregrine:Brian Winterfeldt has joined the AC room
  Nathalie  Peregrine:David cake has joined the call
  Ana Neves:sure
  Ana Neves:still listening...
  Marika Konings:See http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions.htm for ccNSO decisions
  Marika Konings:You can see here the recommendation from the triage committee and the action taken by the ccNSO Council
  Marika Konings:Quickly skimming through it, it looks like that in almost all (if not all) cases, the ccNSO Council has followed the recommendation of the triage committee
  Marika Konings:OK, will do
  Ana Neves:keep the momentum is the motto, indeed...
  Ana Neves:Thank you and bye
  David Cake:Thak you

===========================================================

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:

This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive

use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is

proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you

are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or

distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction.  Please notify

the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original

message without making any copies.

===========================================================

NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has

elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
Gac-gnso-cg mailing list
Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org<mailto:Gac-gnso-cg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gac-gnso-cg

Mason Cole
VP Communications & Industry Relations
Donuts Inc.
....................................
......
......
mason at donuts.co<mailto:mason at donuts.co>
Ofc +1 503 908 7623
Cell +1 503 407 2555

Mason Cole
VP Communications & Industry Relations
Donuts Inc.
....................................
......
......
mason at donuts.co<mailto:mason at donuts.co>
Ofc +1 503 908 7623
Cell +1 503 407 2555

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gac-gnso-cg/attachments/20141125/3400807f/attachment-0001.html>