[CCWG-ACCT] [Acct-Legal] Fwd: Implementation time

[Greg Shatan]

Just sent the agenda to the Legal Sub Team list.

Greg

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:18 PM, List for the work of CCWG-Accountability
Legal SubTeam <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org> wrote:

>  Is there an agenda for today’s call?
>
>
>
> *HOLLY* *J.* *GREGORY*
> Partner
>
> *Sidley Austin LLP*
> +1.212.839.5853
> holly.gregory at sidley.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> ccwg-accountability5-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *List for the work
> of CCWG-Accountability Legal SubTeam
> *Sent:* Monday, April 27, 2015 9:26 PM
> *To:* ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org; CCWG Accountability
> *Subject:* [Acct-Legal] Fwd: Implementation time
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> In compliance with the working methods of the Legal Sub-team I hereby
> inform you that I held a call with Holly Gregory of Sidley Austin in order
> to find out which would be an estimate timeframe for implementation of the
> CCWG proposals under the hypothesis of each of the options that so far have
> been discussed in our meetings.
>
>
>
> This call was held over the phone given the short time ahead of our call
> tomorrow in which we (the Co-Chairs) thought it would be useful to have a
> tentative timeframe of implementation.
>
>
>
> Please note that this information is only for reference of our work and
> timeline and does not imply nor states that any given structure has been
> decided upon as this is something that, of course, will need to be decided
> by the larger community after the public comment period(s) for that end.
>
>
>
> Below is the reply from the lawyers to this inquiry.
>
>
>
> I hope you find this information useful.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> León
>
>
>
>  Inicio del mensaje reenviado:
>
>
>
> *De: *"Gregory, Holly" <holly.gregory at sidley.com>
>
> *Asunto: RE: Implementation time*
>
> *Fecha: *27 de abril de 2015 19:13:13 GMT-5
>
> *Para: *'León Felipe Sánchez Ambía' <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>
>
> *Cc: *"Rosemary E. Fei" <rfei at adlercolvin.com>, ICANN-Adler <
> ICANN at adlercolvin.com>, Sidley ICANN CCWG <sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com>
>
>
>
> Dear Leon,
>
> The Sidley and Adler & Colvin teams have conferred and can confirm the
> rough estimate that I provided by phone earlier today as follows:
>
> Assuming that we have very clear direction and guidance, the legal work of
> preparing proposed amendments to ICANN’s articles and bylaws could be
> accomplished in as little as two weeks.  However, as we have explained, in
> the drafting process issues may become apparent that have not been
> anticipated and need additional guidance from CCWG and this would slow the
> drafting process down.
>
> Similarly, assuming clear direction and guidance on the ACs/SOs and
> assuming that these entities do not have assets or revenues,  the documents
> for the unincorporated associations (assuming 6) could be drafted in
> another two weeks.
>
> Thus, the drafting of amendments to the core ICANN governance documents
> and creation of basic streamlined unincorporated association documents
> should take about four to six weeks total, to have solid first drafts for
> review.
>
> We do not have any ability to assess what time will be required by CCWG
> and other community structures, including ICANN staff, ICANN counsel, the
> ICANN board, and each of the SO/ACs, to review, comment on and sign off on
> the revised ICANN governing documents and the new SO/AC unincorporated
> association documents.  We assume that this time could well be
> significantly greater than the legal drafting time required.    (Nor do we
> have insight at this time as to expectations with regard to any discussion
> with or review by the NTIA or other US government entity.)
>
> In terms of regulatory filings, with both the designator and membership
> models all that is required is that the new articles of incorporation be
> filed with the State of California.  (The bylaws need not be filed to
> become effective, but will be publicly disclosed to California and federal
> government agencies in due course.)  There is no approval process to factor
> in at the state or federal level.
>
> Of course, these estimates relate to the CCWG project and do not include
> time for any structural changes related to IANA functions under discussion
> in the CWG project.
>
> Kind regards,
> Holly
>
> HOLLY J. GREGORY
> Partner
>
> Sidley Austin LLP
> +1.212.839.5853
> holly.gregory at sidley.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía [mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx
> <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>]
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 2:46 AM
> To: Gregory, Holly; Rosemary E. Fei
> Subject: Implementation time
>
> Dear Holly and Rosemary,
>
> I know that what I am about to ask might seem like asking for the numbers
> on bingo but we would like to have a rough reference timeframe for
> implementation of changes to be ready and legally valid. This, of course,
> assuming we choose either structure (membership or designators).
>
> Please let me know if I can be of further help.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> León
>
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
> 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/20150428/2e279c40/attachment.html>