[CCWG-ACCT] Objection (Re: [Acct-Legal] Nomcom as a UA - legal question)

Sat Apr 25 10:11:30 UTC 2015

I have about have it with the unappointed participant of a vested interest making decisions. 

Never mind that he just is not entitled to make the ones at hand. Under the Charter or in any other way! Technically this triggers billable hours, so even formally it may not withstand an audit.

Yes, read it s objection, for the record.

I repeat my demand for the question whether the USG has in fact a base for its "claim" (for the lack of a better word) to the root, and the consequences thereof (if it does not, we have an idea what this means already, if does, may it transfer it (an asset (of sorts)) in the manner proposed, and how does all of this affect (cc)TLDs (when looking at this in chronological batches).

The absolute only reason I can see to ignore or avoid the question, is knowing or being concerned about the answer, but not having this done creates an accountability issue in itself.

I do note, by the way, at last reading of my email the deafening silence about the conflict between the IPC lobbyist's statement about what he alleged as to have said in the Legal SubTeam meeting of 2015-04-08 and the transcript of what he actually did say.

I have no issues with anyone representing anyone's interests and even as aggressively and flouting rules as Americans businesses are so admired for all over the world, by the way. If I had that kind of money I'd also get me one of these onto both CWG and CCWG and influence the outcome. 

Whatever it takes...

el
-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

> On Apr 25, 2015, at 03:50, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> Holly,
> 
> Yes, please proceed to answer the questions posed in Avri's email.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Greg
> 
>> On Friday, April 24, 2015, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org> wrote:
>> Thanks Greg. I take it that the Legal SubTeam would like us to add this to the list of questions we are answering. Holly
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
>> 
>>  
>> From: ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org on behalf of List for the work of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam
>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 05:54:47 PM
>> To: Avri Doria; ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
>> Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Acct-Legal] [CCWG-ACCT] Nomcom as a UA - legal question
>> 
>> Avri,
>> 
>> I am forwarding your question to the Legal Sub Team list.
>> 
>> Greg
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am confused as to how this works.  Please forgive my questions.  This has less to do with the proposal I made then with trying to understand the nature of a UA.  I had not realized until yesterday that the membership model was as popular as it has been defined to be.  I had also not realized that we were down to membership or designator model as our only choices until today.
>>> 
>>> What qualifies the Nomcom as an association?  It can't be the people, as there is no continuity, except among the staff. and  some overlap in chairs as last year's chair, this years' chair and next year's possible chair,  sit togehter each year. I guess that  is a bit of natural person continuity.  Is that chair thread significant? 
>>> 
>>> Or is that it is always formed according to same bylaw, even if all of the people are different, that is a qualifying mark? Is being a differnt instantiation of the same process sufficient to define a UA, even if there is no continuity of natural persons?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> 
>>> 
>>> avrl
>>> 
>>> Note: I would have sent this to the legal list, but i never managed to get subscribed that one as far as I can tell. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  	
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
>>> www.avast.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> ****************************************************************************************************
>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
>> immediately.
>> 
>> ****************************************************************************************************
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-accountability5 mailing list
> Ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability5
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150425/375ff71b/attachment.html>