[CCWG-ACCT] Who is managing the lawyers and what have they beenasked to do?
Burr, Becky
Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
Thu Jul 9 02:27:43 UTC 2015
I agree Christopher, but everything we have heard says the court issue is manageable. But we keep fixating on it
Sent from my iPad
> On Jul 8, 2015, at 5:23 PM, CW Lists <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
>
> Becky:
>
> It matters a great deal. A system, albeit in US jurisdiction, that depends on US courts could not be entertained.
>
> CW
>
>
>
>
>> On 08 Jul 2015, at 22:42, "Burr, Becky" <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz> wrote:
>>
>> Avri -
>>
>> Does it matter to you if the jaws are the jaws of a court or the jaws of
>> the IRP?
>>
>> B
>> J. Beckwith Burr
>> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>> Office: + 1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 /
>> becky.burr at neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 7/7/15, 8:49 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I do want to point out that I have moved away from the voluntary
>>> community model, though it remains dear to my heart to accepting a form
>>> of designator model.
>>>
>>> I also see that the empowered membership models, is in some ways,
>>> similar to the empowered designator model. Unfortunately it also has
>>> the ability to slide down the slope to a full membership model. and as
>>> I have argued, I think that leaves ICANN not only without proper checks
>>> and balnces, but into the jaws of the courts.
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>> On 07-Jul-15 08:29, Jordan Carter wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Firstly I think facts speak for themselves, but it is our
>>>> understanding of them - including how they change through the
>>>> accumulation of further facts - that changes over time. And am not a
>>>> scientist. Nor a lawyer :-)
>>>>
>>>> On Avri's broad point, it does summn up a nub of the debate. I
>>>> reiterate for the record that my concern with ICANN's post-transition
>>>> reality is that power is concentrated from the status quo (NTIA -
>>>> Board, with community advie) into a newly powerful and concentrated
>>>> single entity - the ICANN Board.
>>>>
>>>> The purpose of a membership or designator model is to distribute power
>>>> into the global multistakeholder community, as organised through the
>>>> SO/AC structure, which is how ICANN organises the various stakeholders
>>>> with interests in the DNS.
>>>>
>>>> There's no claim of perfection in such a model. Quite the opposite.
>>>> The whole point of a distribution of power is to share accountability
>>>> and responsibility more broadly.
>>>>
>>>> The "voluntary" model concentrates power in one place to an unhealthy
>>>> degree. It is difficult for me to understand how anyone could accept a
>>>> clear worsening of accountability and concentration of power that it
>>>> represents, compared with the status quo.
>>>>
>>>> Seems to me the sole difference between members and designators comes
>>>> down to how strong you want the auhority of the community to be.
>>>> Neither represents "total" power: there is no abrogation in either of
>>>> the Board's responsibility to govern ICANN consistent with its limited
>>>> mission and consistent with the global public interest.
>>>>
>>>> All that either offers is an acknowledgement that authority in the DNS
>>>> community should lie with stakeholders. Organised through the SOs and
>>>> ACs.
>>>>
>>>> That's the same as where authority in the RIR community lies.
>>>>
>>>> As I understand it, it is also pretty similar towhere authority in
>>>> the protocols community lies.
>>>>
>>>> It isn't clear to me why the names community would settle for a less
>>>> reliable and reputable model.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anyhow, much fodder for thought as we come to Paris. I think we have
>>>> to acknowledge that the differences here are of degree, except in
>>>> regards to the voluntary model. That oe stands on its own as a unique
>>>> reallocation of authority into a single place in a manner that would
>>>> ceate serious risks for all of us in assuring the stability and
>>>> security of the DNS.
>>>>
>>>> best
>>>> Jordan
>>>>
>>>> On 7 July 2015 at 23:52, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> To start, I believe that facts are just things that people believe
>>>> to
>>>> be the case. I try not to speak of anthing stronger that a belief.
>>>> Both my personal history and world histoy, even history of science
>>>> -
>>>> that bastion of fact, shows me that yesterda's Fact is often just a
>>>> matter of prejudice, superstition and point of view.
>>>>
>>>> In terms of the accountability problem with the membership model,
>>>> it has
>>>> been discussed before. Fairly extensively. Some of the gaps such as
>>>> those exposed by the UA have been eliminated, but others have
>>>> not. Some
>>>> involve the degree to which the various SOAC are really the solid
>>>> organizations we portray. As Iwrote in an earlier message where i
>>>> spoke of the SOAC themselves:
>>>>> Having been a member or observer of many of these entities I
>>>> have fond
>>>>> that they are often disorganized, ruled by a few strong
>>>> personalities in
>>>>> a se of apathy, and given to making up rules on the fly when
>>>> needed.
>>>>> They do not even necessarily follow the rules they have agreed
>>>> to in the
>>>>> charters, hough some do, not all of them. And for the most
>>>> part, though
>>>>> they are supposed to transparent, most aren't.
>>>>
>>>> Are these structures really fit of unchecked rule? How can we
>>>> show that?
>>>>
>>>> For me the primary deficit is the loss of checks and balances.
>>>>
>>>> The current system relies on a set of checks and balances between
>>>> the
>>>> Board andthe rest of the community. The current problem is that
>>>> the
>>>> power of the rest of the community seem too weak to many, allowing
>>>> the
>>>> Board to seemingly work without any checks on its activities.
>>>>
>>>> By strengthening the community in the designator model, we
>>>> strengthen
>>>> the set of checks and balance between the Board and the rest of the
>>>> community. By doing so, we increase accountability.
>>>>
>>>> There is a reciprocity in this notion of accountability, one that
>>>> does
>>>> not require external oversight. We vote them in, can appeal the
>>>> board
>>>> in a serious manner and will even be able to vote them out by
>>>> some yet
>>>> to be determined procedure. And the Board, can review the degree to
>>>> which the stakeholder groups are fulfilling their mandate to
>>>> represent
>>>> the larger community within the ICANN mission. In a sense there is
>>>> mutual reciprocal oversight. The Board and the rest of the community
>>>> check each other and establish a functional balance. Most of the
>>>> this
>>>> CCWG's activities are working on the details of these check and
>>>> balances.
>>>>
>>>> That is other than the grand reorganization of ICANN into a
>>>> membership
>>>> organization. Something that leaves the current check and balances
>>>> behind and attempts to create a major new structure.
>>>>
>>>> In the designator model the Board can make decisions and we can
>>>> appeal
>>>> them. And we make recommendations and give advise the Board needs to
>>>> give it serious consideration on penalty of appeal. In extreme
>>>> case they
>>>> can be removed from their duties and we can be subjected to
>>>> disussions
>>>> of reorganization.
>>>>
>>>> Going to the membership model eliminaes this balance by giving the
>>>> putative community representatives supreme power. How can that
>>> power be
>>>> appealed? Can membership decisions be appealed, by whom and to
>>>> whom?
>>>> Who determines whether the ACSO are adequately representing the
>>>> global
>>>> community and living up to their obligations under the bylaws?
>>>> Membership turns the Board into an administrative unit without
>>>> sufficient power to act as a check or balance to the ACSOs.
>>>>
>>>> Eliminating any checks and balances on the ACSO from the
>>>> accountability
>>>> equation seems to be a critical failure to me in the creation of a
>>>> new
>>>> accountability regime. Perhaps if we were going with the individual
>>>> membership option a degree of accountability to global members
>>>> could be
>>>> argued, not sure. But I believe that is not what we are working
>>>> on as
>>>> that would involve even greater difficulty to get right. We are
>>>> not even
>>>> working on a model where organizations that exist on their own come
>>>> together to form a group. Our ACSO are artificial organizations
>>>> created
>>>> by and within ICANN. Our multistakeholder model depends on the
>>>> interaction and interplay of these organization with the Board and
>>>> on
>>>> the checks and balances between them.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you have 'fact based' responses to all the possible
>>>> accountability questions that NTIA might ask us about this new power
>>>> structure you favor. I do not believe tht you can show how the
>>>> ACSO
>>>> will be responsible to the global Internet community. I a rogue set of ACSO can be stopped from doing
>>>> things
>>>> that harm the organizations or the Internet without allowing the
>>>> Board
>>>> some degree of decision making based on the confluence of
>>>> recommendations and advice received from the various ACSO and the
>>>> greater community.
>>>>
>>>> As was stated in the call by NTIA, it was up to us to show how
>>>> anything
>>>> new we created could be held accountable. As far as I can tell in
>>>> membership there is no way to hold the members accountable. In the
>>>> designator model we show how we are adding accountability
>>>> measures. In
>>>> the membership model we require the ACSO to verify their own
>>>> representativity, but I have seen no expression of how they can do
>>>> that
>>>> or show that it is the case. When I speak of having a "much higher
>>>> threshold" in proving ACSO accountabilty to the global public
>>>> interest,
>>>> this is what I mean. How are you going to prove, as you say - with
>>>> the
>>>> facts that you believe in, that the membership model is more
>>>> accountable
>>>> given its unassailable postion in a membership organization.
>>>>
>>>> I have seen no evidence of membership creating greater
>>>> accountability to
>>>> the global public interest. I cannot state that I believe it is
>>>> impossible for it to do so, just that I have seen no evidence of it.
>>>>
>>>> avri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 06-Jul-15 21:01, Edward Morris wrote:
>>>>> Hello Avri,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe membership raises the issues of accountability to
>>>> the full
>>>>> diversity of stakeholders to a much higher threshold,
>>>> including the
>>>>> issue of the degree to which ICANN is accountable to
>>>> stakeholders not
>>>>> included among our SG/C/RALO/ALS / as well as among
>>>> parrticpating CCs
>>>>> and govts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please, if possible, raise your concerns stating fact rather than
>>>>> belief. Maybe there is something I have missed. There is
>>>> absolutely no
>>>>> difference in the openness to non ICANN stakeholders between the
>>>>> empowered membership and empowered designator models.At least I
>>>> don't
>>>>> see any. Both are based upon the current SOAC's. If there is a
>>>>> ifference in this area I need to and want to be educated. Please
>>>>> respond with specific and detailed instances or examples of why
>>>> what
>>>>> you claim is true is. Vague general > Again, I am open to be educated and persuaded but with substantive
>>>>> fact rather than vague as yet unsubstantiated beliefs.
>>>>>
>>>>> No model is as open to non SOAC's as is Malcolm's proposal for
>>>>> individual membership. That, again, is a membership modip model and if not why not? Would you
>>>>> prefer other models to be looked at that are not based upon the
>>>>> SOAC's? I think that would be a very reasonable position and one I
>>>>> certainly am open to supporting if a workable model would be
>>>> proposed.
>>>>> As yet I have not seen o >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think enough of the comments bring out questions of
>>>>> accountability in
>>>>> p option less
>>>> than
>>>>> optimal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What comments are you referring to? Certainly not the public
>>>> comments
>>>>> which were basically supportive of membership. Are these
>>>> comments you
>>>>> refer to based upon vague generalities or specific proboblems what specifically are they? Should we not
>>>>> determine whether there are solution to those problems rather
>>> ht? If not, what are your views
>>>> as to
>>>>> the ultimate apparent unenforceability of the designator model in
>>>>> certain areas? Do you disagree with Paul Rosenzweig when he states
>>>>> that "a direct community veto of budget and strategic plan remains
>>>>> essential to accountability"? If not, what do you propose to do in
>>>>> tese areas without membership. Should we simply forget them?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do think there may be another option or two out there and
>>>> hopefully
>>>>> working with our counsel we'll find them.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the interim, I really am looking to be educated. No one has
>>>> taught
>>>>> me more about ICANN since I became involved in it than you Avri.
>>>> I'm
>>>>> just not easily persuadable by vague opinions, I'm a fact based
>>>> sort
>>>>> of guy. As this process has moved forward I've seen your views and
>>>>> positions change. To me, that is an admirable sign of someone
>>>> truly
>>>>> looking for an optimal answer rather than one who is clinging to a
>>>>> defined position. I'm just having some trouble understanding,
>>>>> factually, the specific objections you are now raising about
>>>>> membership. I hope you can help me understand so I can better
>>>> test and
>>>>> evaluate my own views..
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06-Jul-15 19:05, Edward Morris wrote:
>>>>>> +1. Well said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Jonathan Zuck
>>>>> <JZuck at actonline.org <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>
>>>> <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>>
>>>>>> <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>
>>>> <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org <mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm. I think it¹s important to bear in mind that there
>>>> was
>>>>>> overwhelming consensus among the public comments to
>>>> support the
>>>>>> membership model. The detractors from the model, while
>>>> important
>>>>>> and perhaps critical, are not in the majority. I¹m not
>>>> sure this
>>>>>> process speaks to how we better use counsel as much as
>>>> how we
>>>>>> achieve consensus on principles.
>>>> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>
>>>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>] *On
>>>>>> Behalf Of *Seun Ojedeji
>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, July 6, 2015 3:50 PM
>>>>>> *To:* Becky Burr
>>>>>> *Cc:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Who is managing the lawyers
>>>> and what
>>>>>> have they beenasked to do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Becky,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for asking, item 3 is actually in connection to
>>>> the fact
>>>>>> that such veto may not be possible without item 1(as I
>>>>> understood
>>>>>> it) and that is why I said an indirect veto can happen
>>>> not
>>>>> that I
>>>>>> was entirely suggesting that those powers be off the
>>>> table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seem however that folks are only looking at the
>>>> powers
>>>>> and not
>>>>>> at what it will take to have them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, I also did put in a reservation that we
>>>> may not
>>>>>> necessarily agree with those views but my concern is
>>>> mainly that
>>>>>> the ccwg does not spend so much time developing
>>>> proposals
>>>>> that we
>>>>>> know has certain implementation requirements that are
>>>> not
>>>>>> compatible with the ICANN community structure. I think
>>>> we should
>>>>>> learn from the the past (based on comments from the
>>>> last PC) and
>>>>>> utilize legal council and volunteer hours more
>>>> effectively.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW speaking as participant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6 Jul 2015 8:08 pm, "Burr, Becky"
>>>> <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz <mailto: > <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>>
>>>>>> <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>
>>>>> <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seun,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure why we would take direct
>>>> budget/strat plan
>>>>> veto
>>>>>> off the table. Could you explain? Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Becky
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J. Beckwith Burr
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief
>>>>> Privacy Officer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office: + 1.202.533.2932
>>>> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932>
>>>>> <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932> Mobile:
>>>>>> +1.202.352.6367 <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367>
>>>>>> <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>
>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>>
>>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>
>>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz
>>>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>>> /
>>>> www.neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz>
>>>>> <http://www.neustar.biz>
>>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.neustar.bi-20&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=OzOY9t2UnISMzIHGUVIZf0U69CCypY-ncfMxp4YS3Mk&s=mn9UldPS0AEy6lvjqhIt5nuPgf_f2KPjpKVTJjJWB5k&e= > >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From: *Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>>
>>>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>>>>
>>>>>> *Date: *Monday, July 6, 2015 at 11:09 AM
>>>>>> *To: *Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org
>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>
>>>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org
>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org
>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>>>
>>>>>> *Cc: *Accountability Community
>>>>>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>>>
>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Who is managing the
>>>> lawyers and
>>>>>> what have they beenasked to do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have no problem with having a new proposal
>>>> presented.
>>>>>> However it is important that there some adherence
>>>> to basic
>>>>>> principles on proposals that the ccwg would not
>>>> want to
>>>>>> explore. Three areas comes to mind:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Its my understanding that anything that will
>>>> turn some/all
>>>>>> of the SO/AC to members and thereby exposing them
>>>> to legal
>>>>>> challenge is not acceptable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Its my understanding that anything that alloof
>>>>>> individual board member without the approval of the
>>>>> entire(or
>>>>>> larger part) of the community is not acceptable
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Its my understanding that a solution that allows
>>>> direct
>>>>>> community veto on certain elements like budget,
>>>>> strategic plan
>>>>>> et all is not acceptable but an indirect enforcement
>>>>> could be
>>>>>> considered (i.e using a power to get another power
>>>> executed
>>>>>> indirectly)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some/none of the above may be acceptable by us,
>>>> but my point
>>>>>> is that there should be some focus going forward,
>>>> especially
>>>>>> if the target of ICANN54 is to be meet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Robin Gross
>>>>>> <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>
>>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>>>> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would also like to hear what they propose at
>>>> this
>>>>>> stage. I really don't see how it could hurt
>>>> to have
>>>>>> another proposal to consider. Larry
>>>> Strickling did
>>>>> say he
>>>>>> wanted us to be sure we examined all the options
>>>>> carefully.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jul 6, 2015, t 7:32 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree. We should have the benefit of
>>>> their
>>>>> thoughts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Jordan
>>>> Carter
>>>>>> <jordant.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>>
>>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, I would really really like to
>>>> see what the
>>>>>> creative thinking they have done has
>>>>> suggested. I
>>>>>> trust our ability as a group to make
>>>> decisions,
>>>>>> and do not believe we should cut off
>>>> input from
>>>>>> any direction...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jordan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7 July 2015 at 01:13, James Gannon
>>>>>> <james at cyberinvasion.net
>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>
>>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net
>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>
>>>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net
>>>> <mailtberinvasion.net>
>>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net
>>>> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey Avri,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes the 3rd model was brought up,
>>>> and the
>>>>>> lawyers feel that it might be a
>>>> cleaner way
>>>> for us to get the powers that we
>>>> need.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But without a call from the CCWG to
>>>>> present it
>>>>>> they feel that its not their
>>>> position to
>>>>>> propose a model on their own
>>>> initiative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally i would like to see
>>>> what they
>>>>> have
>>>>>> come up with but the CCWG would
>>>> need to
>>>>> ask as
>>>>>> an overall group for the chairs to
>>>>> direct them
>>>>>> to give some more information on the
>>>>> model if
>>>>>> we wanted it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think if after we hear from them
>>>> on
>>>>> Tuesdays
>>>>>> call we still feel we might have
>>>> some
>>>>>> shortcomings that it might be the
>>>> time
>>>>> to ask
>>>>>> them about the 3rd option.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also +1 I think they are really
>>>> enjoying the
>>>>>> and are finding themselves
>>>> getting more
>>>>>> and more involved as we go on,
>>>> which is
>>>>> great
>>>>>> for the CCWG as the more
>>>> background and
>>>>>> details they know the better that
>>>> are
>>>>> able to
>>>>>> give us solid well reasoned advice
>>>> in my
>>>>> opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -James
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6 Jul 2015, at 13:19, Avri
>>>> Doria
>>>>>> <avri at acm.org
>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org> <mailto:avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
>>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>
>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have not had a chance to get
>>>> back
>>>>> to the
>>>>>> recording of the call. Not
>>>>>> sure I wilt time was the
>>>> time
>>>>> I had
>>>>>> for that call and that is why
>>>>>> i was listening then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, th lawyers were
>>>> talking
>>>>>> about a new model they had come
>>>> up
>>>>>> with, but not knowing what to do
>>>>> about it
>>>>>> since they had not been asked
>>>>>> for a new model.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was told to leave before I
>>>> got to hear
>>>>>> the end of that story. Or about
>>>>>> the model itself. Anyone who
>>>> has had a
>>>>>> chance to listen, whatever
>>>> happened?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ps. sometimes i think the
>>>> lawyers are
>>>>>> getting interested in what we
>>>> are
>>>>>> doing, almost like
>>>> stakeholders. not
>>>>> that
>>>>>> i expect them to give up their
>>>>>> hourly rates because they are
>>>>> stakeholders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06-Jul-15 05:07, James
>>>> Gannon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I listened to the last
>>>> co-chairs
>>>>>> lawyers¹ call at;
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_
>>>> pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D53782602&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL
>>>> rw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIG
>>>> rVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=zSmXcLCXRxT8cvoxbhuDA2mgEJqygwNhe2KdqzxJaeo&e=
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org
>>>> _pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D53782602&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lU
>>>> Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX5HA
>>>> BE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=5REzt6Gk0Mt5evnhe_F8O87Kpc4hX8wql7vP--WYsnQ&e=>
>>>>>> (I¹m a glutton for
>>>> punishment)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a short call and
>>>> I¹ll make a
>>>>>> particular note that Leon
>>>> and
>>>>>> Mathieu made a point of not
>>>>> making any
>>>>>> decisions on behalf of the
>>>>>> whole group and made it
>>>> clear
>>>>> anything
>>>>>> requiring a decision must be
>>>>>> made by the overall CCWG,
>>>> so I was
>>>>>> happy with that side of
>>>> things
>>>>>> myself, ost of my own fears
>>>>> about not
>>>>>> having a sub-group are
>>>> somewhat
>>>>>> assuaged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my paraphrasing and
>>>> overview is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> · Lawyers working
>>>> hard
>>>>> on the
>>>>>> models for us
>>>> collaboratively
>>>>>> between the two firms since
>>>> BA
>>>>>>
>>>>>> · Lawyers are
>>>> prepping a
>>>>>> presentation to give to us
>>>> ASAP
>>>>>> before Paris if possible,
>>>> that
>>>>>> presentation will take the
>>>>> majority of
>>>>>> a call, it can¹t be done
>>>>> quickly, they
>>>>>> need about 45mins
>>>> uninterrupted
>>>>>> to go through the
>>>> presentation and
>>>>>> then would likely need Q&A
>>>> time
>>>>>> after they present.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> · Some small
>>>>>> wording/clarifications to
>>>> come
>>>>> back to
>>>>>> the CCWG
>>>>>> to make sure everyone¹s on
>>>> the
>>>>> same page
>>>>>>
>>>>>> · Everyone feels
>>>> Paris
>>>>> will be
>>>>>> an important time for the
>>>>>> models, lawyers will be
>>>> ready for a
>>>>>> grilling on the details of
>>>> the
>>>>>> models from us to flesh
>>>> out any
>>>>> of our
>>>>>> concerns/questions
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note that the above is all
>>>> my very
>>>>>> condensed overview of the
>>>>>> conversations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seemed like a
>>>> productive call
>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -James
>>>>> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>
>>>>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>]
>>>>>> *On Behalf
>>>>>> Of *Greg Shatan
>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, July 06,
>>>> 2015
>>>>> 5:33 AM
>>>>>> *To:* Carlos Raul
>>>>>> *Cc:*
>>>>> accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT]
>>>> Who is
>>>>>> managing the lawyers and
>>>> what have
>>>>>> they beenasked to do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carlos,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As the legal sub-team was
>>>> disbanded,
>>>>>> your guess is as good as
>>>> mine.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at
>>>> 12:27 AM,
>>>>>> Carlos Raul
>>>>> <carlosraulg at gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>
>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>>>
>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:carlosraulg at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Greg!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It makes a lot of sense
>>>> and I
>>>>> guess
>>>>>> those are all good reasons
>>>> as
>>>>>> we hired them in the
>>>> first place.
>>>>>> What are the next steps now?
>>>>>> What happened in the
>>>> recent call?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +506 8837 7176
>>>> <tel:%2B506%208837%207176>
>>>>> <tel:%2B506%208837%207176>
>>>>>> <tel:%2B506%208837%207176>
>>>>>> <tel:%2B506%208837%207176>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Skype carlos.raulg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apartado 1571-1000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *COSTA RICA*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at
>>>> 12:02 AM,
>>>>>> Greg Shatan
>>>> <gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was tried to
>>>> some
>>>>> extent,
>>>>>> at least in the CWG.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are several
>>>> substantial
>>>>>> problems with that approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First, lawyers are
>>>> not
>>>>>> fungible. The particular
>>>> legal
>>>>> skills,
>>>>>> background and
>>>> experience
>>>>>> required for the issues
>>>> before both
>>>>>> WGs are fairly
>>>> specific,
>>>>> and in
>>>>>> some cases, very specific.
>>>>>> The primary core
>>>> competency
>>>>>> needed here is corporate
>>>>>> governance. While a
>>>>> number of
>>>>>> lawyers in the community
>>>> have a
>>>>>> reasonable working
>>>>> knowledge of
>>>>>> the area, at least in their
>>>>>> home jurisdictions,
>>>> I don't
>>>>>> believe there are any who
>>>> would
>>>>>> say that this is
>>>> their
>>>>> primary
>>>>>> focus and expertise -- at
>>>> least
>>>>>> none who identified
>>>>> themselves
>>>>>> to either WG. The second
>>>> core
>>>>>> competency required,
>>>>> especially
>>>>>> in the CCWG, is non-profit
>>>>>> law. Again there
>>>> are a number
>>>>>> of lawyers with a decent
>>>> working
>>>>>> knowledge of this
>>>> fairly
>>>>> broad
>>>>>> field, but not as a primary
>>>>>> focus. There may
>>>> be a couple
>>>>>> of lawyers in the
>>>> community who
>>>>>> would claim this
>>>> fairly broad
>>>>>> field as a primary focus and
>>>>>> expertise -- but
>>>> none who
>>>>>> became involved with
>>>> either WG.
>>>>>> This then becomes
>>>> further
>>>>>> narrowed by jurisdiction.
>>>> Since
>>>>>> ICANN is a California
>>>>>> non-profit corporation, US
>>>> corporate
>>>>>> governance and
>>>> non-profit
>>>>>> experience is more
>>>> relevant than
>>>>>> experience from other
>>>>>> jurisdictions, and
>>>> California law
>>>>>> corporate
>>>> governance and
>>>>>> non-profit experience is
>>>> more
>>>>>> relevant than that
>>>> from other
>>>>>> US jurisdictions. In my
>>>>>> experience, the
>>>> more a US
>>>>>> lawyer focuses on a
>>>> particular
>>>>>> substantive area,
>>>> the greater
>>>>>> their knowledge of and
>>>> comfort
>>>>>> with state law
>>>> issues in US
>>>>>> state jurisdictions other
>>>> than
>>>>>> their own (e.g.,
>>>> someone who
>>>>>> spend a majority of their
>>>> time
>>>>>> working in corporate
>>>>> governance
>>>>>> will have a greater
>>>> knowledge
>>>>>> of the law, issues,
>>>>> approaches
>>>>>> and trends outside their
>>>>>> primary state of
>>>> practice,
>>>>>> while someone who spends a
>>>>>> relatively small
>>>> amount
>>>>> of time
>>>>>> in the area will tend to
>>>> feel
>>>>>> less comfortable
>>>> outside
>>>>> their
>>>>>> home jurisdiction). (An
>>>>>> exception is that
>>>> many US
>>>>>> lawyers have specific
>>>> knowledge of
>>>>>> certain Delaware
>>>>> corporate law
>>>>>> issues, because Delaware
>>>> often
>>>>>> serves as the state
>>>> of
>>>>>> incorporation for entities
>>>> operating
>>>>>> elsewhere.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Second, lawyers in
>>>> the
>>>>>> community will seldom be
>>>> seen as
>>>>>> neutral advisors, no
>>>>> matter how
>>>>>> hard they try. They will
>>>> tend
>>>>>> to be seen as
>>>> working from
>>>>>> their point of view or
>>>> stakeholder
>>>>>> group or "special
>>>>> interest" or
>>>>>> desired outcome, even if
>>>> they
>>>>>> are trying to be
>>>> even-handed.
>>>>>> Over the course of time,
>>>> this
>>>>>> balancing act would
>>>> tend to
>>>>>> become more untenable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Third, the amount
>>>> of time it
>>>>>> would take to provide truly
>>>>>> definitive legal
>>>> advice
>>>>>> (research, careful drafting,
>>>>>> discussions with
>>>> relevant
>>>>>> "clients", etc.) would be
>>>>>> prohibitive, even
>>>> compared to
>>>>>> the substantial amount of
>>>> time
>>>>>> it takes to provide
>>>>> reasonably
>>>>>> well-informed and competent
>>>>>> legal-based
>>>> viewpoints in the
>>>>>> course of either WG's work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fourth, in order to
>>>> formally
>>>>>> counsel the community, the
>>>> lawyer
>>>>>> or lawyers in
>>>> question would
>>>>>> have to enter into a formal
>>>>>> attorney-client
>>>> relationship.
>>>>>> Under US law, an
>>>>>> attorney-client
>>>> relationship
>>>>>> may inadvertently be
>>>> created by
>>>>>> the attorney's
>>>> actions, so
>>>>>> attorneys try to be
>>>> careful about
>>>>>> not providing
>>>> formal legal
>>>>>> advice without a formal
>>>> engagement
>>>>>> (sometimes providing
>>>> an
>>>>>> explicit "caveat" if they
>>>> feel they
>>>>>> might be getting
>>>> too close to
>>>>>> providing legal advice).
>>>> If the
>>>>>> attorney is
>>>> employed by a
>>>>>> corporation, they would
>>>> likely be
>>>>>> unable to take on
>>>> such a
>>>>>> representation due to the
>>>> terms of
>>>>>> their employment,
>>>> and that is
>>>>>> before getting to an
>>>> exploration
>>>>>> of conflict of
>>>> interest
>>>>>> issues. If the attorney
>>>> is employed
>>>>>> by a firm, the firm
>>>> would
>>>>> have
>>>>>> to sign off on the
>>>>>> representation,
>>>> again dealing
>>>>>> with potential conflict
>>>> issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fifth, even if the
>>>> above
>>>>> issues
>>>>>> were all somehow resolved,
>>>> it
>>>>>> would be highly
>>>> unlikely that
>>>>>> any such attorney would
>>>> provide
>>>>>> substantial amounts
>>>> of
>>>>> advice,
>>>>>> written memos, counseling,
>>>> etc.
>>>>>> on a pro bono
>>>> (unpaid) basis,
>>>>>> especially given the
>>>>>> time-consuming
>>>> nature of the
>>>>>> work. Pro bono advice and
>>>>>> representation is
>>>> generally
>>>>>> accorded to individuals and
>>>>>> entities that could
>>>> not
>>>>>> otherwise be able to pay for
>>>>> it. That
>>>>>> is clearly not the
>>>> case here,
>>>>>> at least with ICANN taking
>>>>>> financial
>>>> responsibility. It
>>>>>> would likely be very
>>>> difficult
>>>>>> to justify this to,
>>>> e.g., a
>>>>>> firm's pro bono committee,
>>>> as a
>>>>>> valid pro bono
>>>>> representation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sixth, if ICANN
>>>> were not
>>>>> taking
>>>>>> the role they are taking, it
>>>>>> would be extremely
>>>>> difficult to
>>>>>> identify the "client" in
>>>> this
>>>>>> situation. The
>>>>> "community" is
>>>>>> a collection of sectors,
>>>>>> mostly represented
>>>> by various
>>>>>> ICANN-created structures,
>>>> which
>>>>>> in turn have members
>>>> of
>>>>> widely
>>>>>> varying types (individuals,
>>>>>> corporations,
>>>> sovereigns,
>>>>>> non-profits, IGOs,
>>>> partnerships,
>>>>>> etc.). This would
>>>> also
>>>>> make it
>>>>>> extremely difficult to enter
>>>>>> into a formal
>>>> counseling
>>>>>> relationship with the
>>>> "community."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seventh, this is a
>>>> sensitive,
>>>>>> high-profile,
>>>> transformative set
>>>>>> of actions we are
>>>>> involved in,
>>>>>> which is subject to an
>>>>>> extraordinary amount
>>>> of
>>>>>> scrutiny, not least that
>>>> of the NTIA
>>>>>> and the US
>>>> Congress. That
>>>>>> eliminates any possibility
>>>> of
>>>>>> providing informal,
>>>>>> off-the-cuff, reasonably
>>>>> well-informed but
>>>>>> not quite expert,
>>>>> "non-advice"
>>>>>> advice -- which might
>>>> happen in
>>>>>> a more obscure
>>>> exercise.
>>>>>> There's simply too much at
>>>> stake.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally, I would
>>>> say that a
>>>>>> number of attorneys
>>>> involved in
>>>>>> one or both of the
>>>> WGs are in
>>>>>> fact providing a significant
>>>>>> amount of legal
>>>> knowledge and
>>>>>> experience to the WGs,
>>>> helping
>>>>>> to frame issues,
>>>> whether in
>>>>>> terms of general
>>>> leadership (e.g.,
>>>>>> Thomas, Leon,
>>>> Becky) or more
>>>>>> specifically in a
>>>>>> "lawyer-as-client"
>>>>> capacity --
>>>>>> working with outside
>>>> counsel,
>>>>>> tackling the more
>>>> legalistic
>>>>>> issues, providing as much
>>>> legal
>>>>>> background and
>>>> knowledge as
>>>>>> possible without providing
>>>> the
>>>>>> type of formal
>>>> legal advice
>>>>>> that would tend to create an
>>>>>> attorney-client
>>>> relationship,
>>>>>> etc. So I do think that
>>>> many
>>>>>> lawyers in the
>>>> community are
>>>>>> giving greatly of
>>>> themselves in
>>>>>> this process, even
>>>> though
>>>>> they
>>>>>> cannot and would not be
>>>> able to
>>>>>> formally be engaged
>>>> by the
>>>>>> community as its "counsel of
>>>>> record."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In sum, it might be
>>>> a nice
>>>>>> thought in theory, but it
>>>> is no way
>>>>>> a practical
>>>> possibility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015
>>>> at
>>>>> 3:08 AM,
>>>>>> CW Lists
>>>>> <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>>
>>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
>>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>>>
>>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
>>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu
>>>> <mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good morning:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had decided
>>>> not to
>>>>> enter
>>>>>> this debate. But I am bound
>>>> to
>>>>>> say that the
>>>> thought had
>>>>>> occurred to me at the
>>>> time, that
>>>>>> there were more
>>>> than
>>>>> enough
>>>>>> qualified lawyers in this
>>>>>> community that
>>>> they could
>>>>>> perfectly well have
>>>> counselled S
>>>>>> themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CW
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04 Jul 2015,
>>>> at 08:41,
>>>>>> Greg Shatan
>>>>> <gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
>>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wolfgang,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To your
>>>> first point,
>>>>>> the billing rates were
>>>> clearly
>>>>>> stated in
>>>> the law
>>>>>> firms' engagement letters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To your
>>>> second point,
>>>>>> I'm sure we could all think
>>>> of
>>>>>> other
>>>> projects and
>>>>>> goals where the money
>>>> could have
>>>>>> been
>>>> "better spent."
>>>>>> You've stated yours. But
>>>> that
>>>>>> is not the
>>>> proper
>>>>>> test. This was and
>>>> continues to be
>>>>>> money we
>>>> need to
>>>>> spend
>>>>>> to achieve the goals we have
>>>>>> set. Under
>>>> different
>>>>>> circumstances, perhaps it
>>>> would
>>>>>> be a
>>>> different amount
>>>>>> (or maybe none at all).
>>>> But it
>>>>>> was
>>>> strongly felt at
>>>>>> the outset that the group
>>>> needed
>>>>>> to have
>>>> independent
>>>>>> counsel. Clearly that
>>>> counsel
>>>>>> needed to
>>>> have
>>>>>> recognized expertise in the
>>>>> appropriate
>>>>>> legal
>>>> areas. As
>>>>> such,
>>>>>> I believe we made excellent
>>>>>> choices and
>>>> have been
>>>>>> very well represented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to your
>>>> "better
>>>>>> spent" test, I just had to
>>>> have
>>>>>> $4000.00
>>>> worth of
>>>>>> emergency dental work
>>>> done. This
>>>>>> money
>>>> definitely
>>>>> could
>>>>>> have been "better spent" on
>>>> a
>>>>>> nice
>>>> vacation,
>>>>>> redecorating our living
>>>> room or on
>>>>>> donations to
>>>> my
>>>>> favored
>>>>>> charitable causes. But I
>>>> had
>>>>>> no choice,
>>>> other than
>>>>>> to choose which dentist and
>>>>>> endodontist I
>>>>> went to,
>>>>>> and I wasn't going to cut
>>>>>> corners --
>>>> the dental
>>>>>> work was a necessity.
>>>>>> Similarly,
>>>> the legal
>>>>>> work we are getting is a
>>>>>> necessity
>>>> and whether
>>>>>> we would have preferred to
>>>> spend
>>>>>> the money
>>>>> elsewhere is
>>>>>> not merely irrelevant, it
>>>> is an
>>>>>> incorrect and
>>>>>> inappropriate
>>>> proposition. Many
>>>>> of us
>>>>>> are
>>>> investing vast
>>>>>> quantities of time that
>>>> could be
>>>>>> "better
>>>> spent"
>>>>>> elsewhere as well, but we
>>>> are
>>>>> willing
>>>>>> (grudgingly
>>>>> sometimes)
>>>>>> to spend the time it takes
>>>> to
>>>>>> get it
>>>> right, because
>>>>>> we believe it needs to be
>>>> done.
>>>>>> This is the
>>>>> appropriate
>>>>>> measure, whether it comes to
>>>>>> our time or
>>>> counsels'
>>>>>> time. If we believe in this
>>>>>> project, we
>>>> have to
>>>>>> invest in it, and do what
>>>> it takes
>>>>>> to succeed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course,
>>>> this
>>>>>> investment has to be
>>>> managed wisely
>>>>>> and
>>>> cost-effectively,
>>>>>> and by and large, I
>>>> believe the
>>>>>> CCWG has
>>>> done that
>>>>>> reasonably well -- not
>>>> perfectly,
>>>>>> but
>>>> reasonably
>>>>> well and
>>>>>> with "course corrections"
>>>>>> along the way
>>>>> intended
>>>>>> to improve that management.
>>>>>> It's
>>>> certainly
>>>>> fair to
>>>>>> ask, as Robin has done, for
>>>> a
>>>>>> better
>>>>> understanding of
>>>>>> that management as we go
>>>>>> along. But
>>>> asserting
>>>>>> that the money could have
>>>> been
>>>>>> "better
>>>> spent"
>>>>>> elsewhere sets up a false
>>>> test
>>>>> that we
>>>>>> should not
>>>> use to
>>>>>> evaluate this important
>>>> aspect of
>>>>>> our work.
>>>>> Instead, we
>>>>>> need to focus on whether the
>>>>>> money was
>>>> "well
>>>>> spent"
>>>>>> on these critical legal
>>>>>> services.
>>>> If you have
>>>>>> reason to believe it was
>>>> not,
>>>>>> that could be
>>>>> useful to
>>>>>> know. That would at least
>>>> be
>>>>>> the right
>>>>> discussion to
>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jul
>>>> 4,
>>>>> 2015 at
>>>>>> 1:13 AM, "Kleinwächter,
>>>>>> Wolfgang"
>>>>> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
>>>> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HI,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>> please if you
>>>>>> ask outside lawyers, ask
>>>> for the
>>>>>> price
>>>> tag in
>>>>>> advance. Some of the money
>>>> spend fo
>>>>>> lawyers
>>>> could
>>>>> have
>>>>>> been spend better to
>>>> suppport
>>>>>> and
>>>> enable
>>>>> Internet
>>>>>> user and non-commercial
>>>> groups
>>>>>> in
>>>> developing
>>>>>> countries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche
>>>>>> Nachricht-----
>>>>>> Von:
>>>>>>
>>>>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>>>
>>>>>> im
>>>> Auftrag von
>>>>>> Robin Gross
>>>>>>
>>>> Gesendet: Fr
>>>>>> 03.07.2015 14:57
>>>>>> An:
>>>>> accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>> Community
>>>>>> Betreff:
>>>>>> [CCWG-ACCT] Who is
>>>> managing the
>>>>> lawyers
>>>>>> and
>>>> what have
>>>>> they
>>>>>> beenasked to do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After
>>>> the legal
>>>>>> sub-team was disbanded, I
>>>> haven't
>>>>>> been
>>>> able to
>>>>> follow
>>>>>> what communications are
>>>>>> happening
>>>>> with CCWG
>>>>>> and the independent lawyers
>>>> we
>>>>>> retained.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I
>>>> understand the
>>>>>> lawyers are currently
>>>> "working on
>>>>>> the
>>>> various
>>>>> models"
>>>>>> and will present something
>>>> to
>>>>>> us
>>>> regarding that
>>>>>> work soon. However, *what
>>>>>>
>>>> exactly* have the
>>>>>> lawyers been asked to do and
>>>>>> *who*
>>>> asked them?
>>>>>> If there are written
>>>>>>
>>>> instructions, may
>>>>>> the group please see
>>>> them? Who
>>>>>> is now
>>>> taking on
>>>>>> the role of managing the
>>>> outside
>>>>>>
>>>> attorneys for
>>>>> this
>>>>>> group, including providing
>>>>>>
>>>> instructions and
>>>>>> certifying legal work?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry,
>>>> but I'm
>>>>>> really trying to
>>>> understand what is
>>>>>>
>>>> happening, and
>>>>>> there doesn't seem to be
>>>> much
>>>>>>
>>>> information
>>>>> in the
>>>>>> public on this (or if
>>>> there is,
>>>>>> I can't
>>>> find it).
>>>>>> Thanks for any information
>>>>>> anyone
>>>> can
>>>>> provide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> Robin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>>> mailing
>>>>>> list
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> This email has been checked for
>>>>> viruses by
>>>>>> Avast antivirus software.
>>>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivi
>>>> rus&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahO
>>>> P8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=Q-EfGqsIXHQHXx
>>>> CJSGykpbyacYgkUcq9pi2aLeVDt5U&e=
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antiv
>>>> irus&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYah
>>>> OP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=3Kl-xLZ-zsiAf
>>>> E_l0c-D1OctY2CAccIpPM7a3Zt5pnw&e=>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community
>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jordan Carter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chief Executive
>>>>>> *InternetNZ*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649
>>>>>> <tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649> (mob)
>>>>>> jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>>
>>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>>>
>>>>>> Skype: jordancarter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /A better world through a better
>>>> Internet /
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing
>>>> list
>>>>>>
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailma
>>>> n_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC
>>>> _lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX
>>>> 5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=Yqq66BmsF0-t9R7GjryZsv1k1c4OBxUhFvNoM2kB7g8&e
>>>> =>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Seun Ojedeji,
>>>>>> Federal University Oye-Ekiti
>>>>>> web:
>>>> //https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=
>>>> AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDk
>>>> Mr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=0jeGeVlvL9OdHuagA8IF
>>>> L55Qf0dISl0O2YMMYr2hgTc&e=
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fuoye.edu.ng&d=A
>>>> wMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkM
>>>> r4k&m=rX8zWSdUbF0XJ6RQyX5HABE7NaQIgAXHj6WfvEXkLh8&s=JO_X0eTa_TpfkJXFV8e7p
>>>> 5fCVLDvN5atmTw0JvZra7w&e=>
>>>>>> //Mobile: +2348035233535
>>>> <tel:%2B2348035233535>//
>>>>>> //alt email:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>>> <mailto:email%3Aseun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>
>>>>> <mailto:email%3Aseun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>>> <mailto:email%253Aseun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>>
>>>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>
>>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>>> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>>>/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key to understanding is humility - my
>>>> view !
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
>>>> software.
>>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivi
>>>> rus&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahO
>>>> P8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=Q-EfGqsIXHQHXx
>>>> CJSGykpbyacYgkUcq9pi2aLeVDt5U&e=
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivi
>>>> rus&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahO
>>>> P8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=Q-EfGqsIXHQHXx
>>>> CJSGykpbyacYgkUcq9pi2aLeVDt5U&e=
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jordan Carter
>>>>
>>>> Chief Executive
>>>> *InternetNZ*
>>>>
>>>> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
>>>> jordan at internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>>>> Skype: jordancarter
>>>>
>>>> /A better world through a better Internet /
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>>> _listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_
>>>> lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVc
>>>> gIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_antivir
>>> us&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8
>>> WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIGrVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=Q-EfGqsIXHQHXxCJS
>>> GykpbyacYgkUcq9pi2aLeVDt5U&e=
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_
>>> listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIF-g&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lU
>>> Lrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=WFn00v80Cv5VwEgmjVcgIG
>>> rVjb75abO-S6JrONX7jKM&s=DC5pn-5lpgvzOQxAsZqlWqzOlPswPciKtm5wFUyXD0M&e=
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=AwIFAw&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=OzOY9t2UnISMzIHGUVIZf0U69CCypY-ncfMxp4YS3Mk&s=dhHdaibrw12LpqhrNhRuyGzDrJqUDWS0hmMkTn3xR8Q&e=
>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list