[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC

Wed Jul 13 22:41:29 UTC 2016

Rudi,

Just so I understand your point clearly, when you refer to "in-house
counsel," who are your referring to?

Thanks!

Greg

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I see Greg's points clearly. And the working methodology of ICANN legal as
> a default,  is not the same as 'advice from in-house as default'..that
> would clearly be a disaster.
> Greg's alternative definition of default reads as the ability to appoint
> and use its own council as and when deemed necessary, well I take as a
> given and a necessity.
> And I agree, it would be throwing the baby out with the bath water to even
> suggest a change of counsel :)
> But let's not wish to be dismissive of 'in house' counsel, because of some
> rigorous belief that (Greg's) default drives the process. We are on the
> same page. We drive the process.
> rd
>
> On Jul 13, 2016 2:58 PM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I object, and I think many others objected, to the idea that advice from
>> inhouse (i.e., ICANN legal) should be the "default."  We retained
>> independent counsel to the CCWG for good reasons, and those reasons are
>> still applicable today.  I hope we don't need to rehash that.
>>
>> We need the continued ability and discretion to go directly to CCWG's
>> counsel.  Requesting inhouse to solicit an opinion from an external counsel
>> is not only "cumbersome," it's absolutely antithetical to the relationship
>> between CCWG and its independent counsel.
>>
>> I strongly believe that the "default" must be the status quo, i.e., that
>> the CCWG (through reasonable processes) has the ability and discretion to
>> turn to its own counsel.  Further, I strongly believe that CCWG's
>> independent counsel must remain Sidley Austin and Adler & Colvin.  They
>> have been up a tremendous learning curve and worked with us every step of
>> the way.  It would be folly to cast that aside.  It's worth noting that
>> Sidley is a full-service law firm with offices outside the US in Beijing,
>> Brussels, Geneva, Hong Kong, London, Munich, Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney
>> and Tokyo.  I'm confident that Sidley (and Adler) will (a) tell us when
>> they don't have the expertise to help us, and (b) work with us on working
>> methods to make our use of the firms more cost-effective.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Based on comments on the call today, IMO; A good body of knowledge was
>>> accquired on the subject of legal requests in wg1. WG2 legal resources
>>> would be both inhouse and external, from start, We should be much more
>>> efficient this time around. Each sub however will have their needs and
>>> there may be requests applicable across the subgroups and/or specific to a
>>> subgroup.
>>> So, that suggests close relationship between budget control and the
>>> former legal request team [reconfigured and/or augmented] who would have to
>>> coordinate requests across ws2 sub
>>> groups as i see it.
>>> What determines the initial choice inhouse/external resources may be a
>>> matter of consensus, but it may be prudent to consider the process as
>>> [default] inhouse with the flexible and necessary option of external
>>> sources by consensus [as the fog clears so to speak]. I think it may be
>>> cumbersome to request inhouse to solicit an opinion from an external,
>>>  because there may arise an instance where; on the strength of an opinion,
>>> [inhouse or external] ; a wg2 may wish to reframe and seek
>>> alternative advise elswhere.
>>> rd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rudi Daniel
>>> *danielcharles consulting
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774>*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Vinay Kesari <vinay.kesari at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I was unfortunately unable to join the call as I was on a flight at the
>>>> time, my apologies. I've just had a chance to catch up on the Adobe Connect
>>>> recording, and I'm happy to reconfirm my willingness and availability to
>>>> serve as a rapporteur. Also, I agree with the thrust of Kavouss' comment at
>>>> 0:24:30, and affirm my commitment to serve impartially. I look forward to
>>>> working with Greg on the jurisdiction subgroup.
>>>>
>>>> Separately, on the issue of allocation of legal requests, I agree that
>>>> we need further discussion, and endorse creating an Option 3 based on the
>>>> points made and the specific requirements of the different WS2 subgroups.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Vinay
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12 July 2016 at 20:55, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Attached is a short set of slides to support our discussion on agenda
>>>>> item #4
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk to you in a few hours
>>>>>
>>>>> Mathieu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *De :* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>>>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *De la part de*
>>>>> MSSI Secretariat
>>>>> *Envoyé :* lundi 11 juillet 2016 19:46
>>>>> *À :* CCWG-Accountability
>>>>> *Objet :* [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
>>>>> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Good day all,
>>>>>
>>>>> In preparation for your call, CCWG Accountability WS2 Meeting #2
>>>>> <https://community.icann.org/x/FyOOAw>– Tuesday, 12 July @ 20:00 –
>>>>> 22:00 UTC.  Time zone converter here
>>>>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG+Accountability+Meeting&iso=20160712T20&p1=1440&ah=2>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Proposed Agenda:*
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.        Welcome, SOI
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.        Articles of Incorporation : finalize submission
>>>>>
>>>>> 3.        Appointment of rapporteurs for WS2 – next steps
>>>>>
>>>>> 4.        Legal Cost Control Mechanism : initial discussion
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.        AOB
>>>>>
>>>>> 6.        Closing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Adobe Connect: *https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> With kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Brenda Brewer
>>>>>
>>>>> MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant
>>>>>
>>>>> ICANN- Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20160713/a7d0a84e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160713/a7d0a84e/image002-0001.gif>