[CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Thu Jan 7 15:32:57 UTC 2016

Dear Becky
Dear Jorge,
I am not clear on what is the matter ?
What question needs to be studied?
Who have asked the Question?
Is it a question raised by an individual or participant or CCWG Member?
has the question been  dis cussed by CCWG and agreed to be certified by
CO-Chairs or not?
Before proceeding further we need to answer the above question .
I remeber Jorge raised another question  to be raised to the Lawyer  but
that question when discussed by CCWG was not justified to be studied
If the question relates to and affect the GAC, it should have been raised
by the GAC Chair, no doubt, after agreed by GAC.

2016-01-07 16:00 GMT+01:00 <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>:

> Hi Becky
> that piece was more for the Co-Chairs to answer.
> Notwithstanding personal positions I recall a decision being taken, and as
> far as I remember it was to formulate the question in more specific terms
> after consulting with ICANN Legal.
> So I would very much appreciate any info on this from the Co-Chairs.
> regards
> Jorge
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 07.01.2016 um 15:56 schrieb Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz<mailto:
> Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>>:
> Jorge,
> I personally have been clear and consistent in my view that we were not
> asking the lawyers a question that can lead to a useful legal opinion.  I
> believe that Holly concurred in my view that we would spend a lot of money
> and learn that the answer depends on the facts in any specific situation,
> none of which can be predicted in advance.  I know that you and others
> continue to believe that there is some value in this, but as someone who
> has been on the receiving end of questions like that, I think would be a
> tremendous waste of ICANN resources.
> That said, I’m not the decision-maker here, just offering an opinion.
> Becky
> J. Beckwith Burr
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
> Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<
> http://www.neustar.biz>
> From: "Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>" <
> Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>
> Date: Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 3:47 AM
> To: Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz<mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>>,
> Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Cc: "acct-staff at icann.org<mailto:acct-staff at icann.org>" <
> acct-staff at icann.org<mailto:acct-staff at icann.org>>
> Subject: AW: Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion
> Dear Becky, dear Co-Chairs and dear all,
> For info: this is the full text of the GAC consensus input of December
> 21st on recommendation 5:
> Changing aspects of ICANN’s Mission. Commitments and Core Values
> The GAC notes that legal advice is being sought by the CCWG to clarify the
> practical effect of this Recommendation, and believes this is appropriate.
> The GAC expects that any changes will not reduce the current role of the
> GAC in
> providing 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 (as provided in the current ByLaws). This
> includes
> issues such as consumer protection, the respect for fundamental rights and
> freedoms and law enforcement.
> The GAC further expects that changes to ICANN’s mission and core values
> should
> not constrain the Board from accepting and implementing GAC advice. In
> addition, ICANN’s ability to enforce contractual obligations and act upon
> the
> public policy advice of the GAC should not be inadvertently impacted.
> ==
> And: what happened with the question to the lawyers which we decided to
> formulate to the lawyers on this very issue last December? Could you please
> inform on the status of this question?
> Regards
> Jorge
> Von: 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 Burr,
> Becky
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Januar 2016 20:03
> An: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Cc: ACCT-Staff <acct-staff at icann.org<mailto:acct-staff at icann.org>>
> Betreff: [CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion
> Wichtigkeit: Hoch
> Is attached in DRAFT FORM.  Anything missing or wrong should be attributed
> to incompetence rather than conspiracy.  I am still working on questions in
> 1 section.  I will also shortly resend a variety of previously circulated
> resource documents.
> J. Beckwith Burr
> Neustar, Inc./Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
> Office:+1.202.533.2932  Mobile:+1.202.352.6367 /neustar.biz<
> http://www.neustar.biz>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160107/0df65d63/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list