[WP1] Content Draft with Comments and Tracked Changes - next (Final) draft out 0300 Friday UTC

[Greg Shatan]

Roelof,

On your first point, with my CCWG participant hat on, I agree with you.
With my "process manager" hat on, I think we need others to converge on
this point before we can put it forth as the prime option.

On the second point, I will bring this up to the Legal Sub Team and see
where this request stands.

Greg

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>
wrote:

>   Greg,
>
>  Thanks for that. Still, if I look at the difference in "amount of boxes
> ticked" in the part „summary of desired powers” of the slide deck of 14
> April prepared by counsel, I see no point in continuing to evaluate
> counsel’s advice re designators.
>
>  Maybe you can help me out on another point though. In their
> memorandum/legal assessment of April 10, Sidley and Adler & Colvin
> mentioned the possibility of a „sole membership” structure. Meaning –as far
> as I understood it- that not every AC and every SO would become a member
> (and thus would have to become a legal entity), but the group of
> representatives of the SO’s and AC’s would form a single legal entity and
> would become ICANN’s sole member.
> I have sent several emails to this list suggesting we follow this up as
> one of the serious possibilities, without –as far as I am aware- any effect.
> Do you have any idea what happened to this particular part of counsel’s
> advice?
>
>  Best,
>
>  Roelof
>
>   From: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> Date: maandag 20 april 2015 06:27
>
> To: Roelof Meijer <roelof.meijer at sidn.nl>
> Cc: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>, "wp1 at icann.org" <
> wp1 at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [WP1] Content Draft with Comments and Tracked Changes - next
> (Final) draft out 0300 Friday UTC
>
>   Roelof,
>
>  I would not say that we are not following counsels' advice.  I think we
> are weighing counsels' advice.  Personally, I agree with counsels' advice
> and think we should go in that direction.  That said, we have practical
> difficulties to deal with, particularly how to turn the various SOAC
> entities (and conceivably other entities in the ICANN universe) into
> statutory members.  However, many of the same difficulties appear again if
> we deal with turning SOACs into unincorporated associations to serve as
> designators (as counsel advised).
>
>  As for being slow and time-consuming, I don't disagree.  This is
> unfortunately the byproduct of having a large group making decisions, and
> is not limited to legal advice.  I can't say I have a solution.  But I hope
> we can work through decisions as expeditiously as possible without undue
> haste.
>
>  Greg
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>
> wrote:
>
>>   Greg, Jordan,
>>
>>  What I fail to understand is that -because we do not have the expertise
>> „in house”- we hire two firms that are experts in this field, they give us
>> their shared opinion and we do not follow that.
>> It seems to me that this is one of those things that makes this whole
>> process sometimes so slow and incredibly time consuming.
>>
>>  Do not misunderstand me, I respect the legal experts we have in the
>> CCWG. But we pay (ICANN pays, so the internet community pays) dearly for
>> this advice, they are both renown firms that we took quite some time to
>> select. Why not accept the outcome and move forward, spending our precious
>> time on all the work that still has to be done?
>>
>>  Best,
>>
>>  Roelof
>>
>>   From: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>> Date: vrijdag 17 april 2015 17:28
>> To: Roelof Meijer <roelof.meijer at sidn.nl>
>> Cc: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>, "wp1 at icann.org" <
>> wp1 at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [WP1] Content Draft with Comments and Tracked Changes -
>> next (Final) draft out 0300 Friday UTC
>>
>>   Roelof,
>>
>>  I'm not sure if this answers your question, but I will try.
>>
>>  We do have the recommendation from outside counsel that can be boiled
>> down (though losing nuance) to the statement you quote.  However, it is our
>> decision, not the lawyers', regarding the mechanism the CCWG will actually
>> recommend (though such decision should duly take into account the lawyers'
>> advice among other things).  "Clarity" regarding that decision by the CCWG
>> has not yet been achieved.
>>
>>  Greg
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  Dear Jordan, all,
>>>
>>>  I couldn’t attend the call, so I probably missed something.
>>> But how did we end up with the two law firms we hire stating: „On
>>> balance, “member” organization provides the clearest path for the ICANN
>>> community to exercise the mechanisms and powers under consideration. „ and
>>>  our rapporteur concluding: "Following the CCWG meeting on 10 April,
>>> the rapporteur had assumed there would be clarity regarding the
>>> proposed mechanism. This has not occurred*„*
>>>
>>>
>>>  Best,
>>>
>>>  Roelof
>>>
>>>   From: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>> Date: donderdag 16 april 2015 23:10
>>> To: "wp1 at icann.org" <wp1 at icann.org>
>>> Subject: [WP1] Content Draft with Comments and Tracked Changes - next
>>> (Final) draft out 0300 Friday UTC
>>>
>>>   Hi eveyone
>>>
>>>  Thanks for the call just now.
>>>
>>>  Attached is the working document.
>>>
>>>  Please review if you are inclined. If you have specific comments
>>> please raise them ON THE LIST rather than just to me, so anyone else can
>>> react, and I will take into account any comments on THIS version received
>>> by 0200 UTC on Friday.
>>>
>>>  I will take these comments, clean the document up, do what I can in
>>> the time available to add things like the tables / options for votes, and
>>> then...
>>>
>>>  ... and then circulate a nice clean Final Draft for you (and a mark up
>>> showing what has changed from V3) at around *0300 UTC on Friday.*
>>>
>>>  Then you will have 21h to make any final comments or thoughts.
>>>
>>>  Then, I'll make final adjustments and send it to the co-chairs and
>>> staff, or wherever they tell us to send it, for incorporation in the full
>>> document.
>>>
>>>  This isn't perfect work folks, but it's pretty darn good given the
>>> pace at which we are working.  *Thank you* for all the effort
>>> represented here.
>>>
>>>  cheers
>>> Jordan
>>>
>>>  --
>>>   Jordan Carter
>>>
>>> Chief Executive
>>> *InternetNZ*
>>>
>>> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
>>> jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>> Skype: jordancarter
>>>
>>> *A better world through a better Internet *
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WP1 mailing list
>>> WP1 at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150420/0a44d396/attachment-0001.html>