<!DOCTYPE html>
<html><head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
</head><body><p>Good evening:</p><p>The original text on the <strong><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Scope of GAC Advice </span></strong><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">is unnecessarily antagonistic to the GAC and I grant Leadership's wisdom in making the changes, albeit, diplomatically, damage has likely already been done.<br></span><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">1. I do not support linking GAC advice or indeed the advice of GAC members explicitly to the Bylaws. (a) the Bylaws are not themselves immutable and (b) it is impossible to foresee all issues that may arise in the context of large and complex Rounds in the future.<br><br>2. I would retain the `strong presumption` language. I do not recall a consensus in the PDP to delete that. Quibbling about it can but become an embarrassment to the Board.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">3. I would propose to replace 'various laws' with 'applicable local law' (Articles of Incorporation language).</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Thankyou</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"><br></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">CW</span></p><blockquote type="cite">El 4 de diciembre de 2020 a las 15:46 Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> escribió: <br> <br><div class="ox-7f509384b1-WordSection1"><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">All, </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">This is the <u>Seventh Topical E-mail</u> on outstanding questions being “put to the list.” This covers GAC Advice (Topic 30) </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Remember: We are down to the wire on this, so unless you have a VERY strong objection to these, we will put these into the document. If you do have a big issue with the responses to these (all of which were previously discussed and in emails over the past 1.5 months), please let us know ASAP. Only comments that provide the rationale for the objection with proposed replacement text to address the specific outstanding questions will now be considered. </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Lets not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><strong><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">ISSUE: Scope of GAC Advice </span></strong></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> <span style="text-decoration: none;"> </span> </span></u></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> <span style="text-decoration: none;"> </span> </span></u></p><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="A"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Current Recommendations </span></u></li><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Recommendation 30.3</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, GAC Consensus Advice must include a clearly articulated rationale. The Working Group recommends that GAC Consensus Advice be limited to the scope set out in the applicable Bylaws provisions and elaborate on any “interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues.” To the extent that the rationale for GAC Consensus Advice is based on public policy considerations, well-founded merits-based public policy reasons must be articulated. </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Recommendation 30.4</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: Section 3.1 of the 2012 Applicant Guidebook states that GAC Consensus Advice “will create a strong presumption for the ICANN Board that the application should not be approved.” Noting that this language does not have a basis in the current version of the ICANN Bylaws, the Working Group recommends omitting this language in future versions of the Applicant Guidebook to bring the Applicant Guidebook in line with the Bylaws language. The Working Group further notes that the language may have the unintended consequence of hampering the ability of the Board to facilitate a solution that mitigates concerns and is mutually acceptable to the applicant and the GAC as described in the relevant Bylaws language. Such a solution could allow an application to proceed. In place of the omitted language, the Working Group recommends including in the Applicant Guidebook a reference to applicable Bylaws provisions that describe the voting threshold for the ICANN Board to reject GAC Consensus Advice. </span></li></ol></ol><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 1.0in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="2" type="A"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Comments</span></u></li></ol><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Re 30.4 - Some governments (including France and Switzerland) have concerns about the removal of “strong presumption”, but this is not a GAC Consensus statement. </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Re 30.3 – The GAC (and this is supported by a Consensus of GAC) opposes any limitation on the scope of GAC Advice like that found in 30.3 </span></li><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Bylaws State</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: “The Governmental Advisory Committee should consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN as they relate to concerns of governments, particularly matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues.” </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Our Report states</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: To the extent that the rationale for GAC Consensus Advice is based on public policy considerations, well-founded merits-based public policy reasons must be articulated </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">The Difference</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">:<u> </u>Our WG added the language “well-founded merits-based public policy reasons must be articulated.” </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">IPC Argues</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: We should make this even stronger and add more requirements that there should be data, facts or other evidence provided by GAC as well as reference to relevant national or Internation law wherever possible. </span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: .25in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">GAC</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">: Argues that this is not right. If for 30.4 we are insisting on mirroring the language in the Bylaws, why, they argue, are we not mirroring the Bylaws language for 30.3? </span></li></ol></ol><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black; background: white;"> </span></p><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="3" type="A"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="color: black; margin-left: 0in;"><u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; background: white;">Leadership Proposal:</span></u><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; background: white;"> </span></li></ol><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="color: black; margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; background: white;">Leadership believes that the Working Group still supports the notion of defaulting to the Bylaws when talking about GAC Consensus Advice and that we should be consistent. Therefore, we would recommend keeping 30.4 as is, but changing 30.3 to “</span><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: red;">As <s>stated in the ICANN Bylaws</s> has been the practice of the GAC since at least as early as ICANN56</span><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: windowtext;">, GAC Consensus Advice must include a clearly articulated rationale. The Working Group recommends that GAC Consensus Advice be limited to the scope set out in the applicable Bylaws provisions and elaborate on any “interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues.” </span><s><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: red;">To the extent that the rationale for GAC Consensus Advice is based on public policy considerations, well-founded merits-based public policy reasons must be articulated.</span></s></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="color: black; margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: windowtext;">Rationale</span></li><ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="color: black; margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: windowtext;">We recognize that this goes counter to the comments of the IPC, but we believe we should be consistent. If we are insisting adherence to the Bylaws, then we should take them as a whole, not just the parts that we support. And the reality is that even though it makes logical sense for well-founded merits-based public policies be articulated, this language is not in the Bylaws.</span></li><li class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoListParagraph" style="color: black; margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: windowtext;">With respect to the first change, we could not find in the ICANN Bylaws where it mandates a clearly articulated rationale, but it has been the practice of the GAC to include one since ICANN56.</span></li></ol></ol><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black; background: white;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"> </p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><strong><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Please have your comments (If any) by no later than 23:59:59 UTC on Tuesday, December 8, 2020. </span></strong></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><strong><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></strong></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Sincerely, </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;"> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">Jeff & Cheryl </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif;">SubPro Co-Chairs </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"> </p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"> </p><table class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoTableGrid" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none;"><tbody><tr><td width="192" valign="bottom" style="width: 144.3pt; border: none; border-top: solid #06175F 3.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;"><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black; border: none windowtext 1.0pt; padding: 0in;"><img width="178" height="81" style="width: 1.8489in; height: .8437in;" id="ox-7f509384b1-Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image002.png@01D6CA22.4C0E6940"></span></p></td><td width="173" valign="bottom" style="width: 129.95pt; border: none; border-top: solid #06175F 3.0pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;"><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: #06175f;">Jeffrey J. Neuman</span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black;">Founder & CEO</span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: #06175f;">JJN Solutions, LLC</span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black;">p: +1.202.549.5079</span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black;">E: </span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif;"><a href="mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: #1155cc;">jeff@jjnsolutions.com</span></a> </span></p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; color: black;">http://jjnsolutions.com</span></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"> </p><p class="ox-7f509384b1-MsoNormal"> </p></div></blockquote><p class="default-style"><br> </p><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________ <br>Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list <br>Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org <br>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg <br>_______________________________________________ <br>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote><p class="default-style"><br> </p></body></html>