[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
Edward Morris
egmorris1 at toast.net
Thu Jul 14 06:54:43 UTC 2016
Hi Avri,
>
> I can't imagine we would agree with ICANN in house legal being our
> default. Not even sure I understand why it is being considered.
Hopefully it no longer is.
>
> Which of the firms maps to each of the issues?
>
Before it was disbanded (although I'm not sure it ever was; one day we verbally learned our services were no longer needed but there was no on
list discussion of the matter ) the EC of the legal sub-team assigned questions to the firms on a question by question basis taking into consideration the perceived expertise of each of the firms. I recall one session where we did so ending past midnight at the Istanbul F2F. I could perceive of questions in each of the subgroups that would map to either one of the firms or even to both (a few questions were sent to both firms).
Cost control is an appropriate thing for us to consider. I can conceive of questions where ICANN corporate legal would be a resource we can use. It should not be the default, though, but rather the determination of those charged on the legal team with making the question assignments to assign to them as such. I would also strongly encourage a procedure by where the legal team could assign questions to
Sidley or Adler or both and that assignment to Sidley and Adler combined not be the default either. One of the firms is less expensive than the other (those of us on the team that interviewed the firms were made aware of certain contractual matters; I don't recall what was confidential so will not disclose the specifics here) and certainly cost should be among the issues considered when choosing where to assign questions. The greater the flexibility given to the legal team to manage the flow of questions IMHO the greater the chance we'll get the needed advice at the best possible cost.
Ed
> avri
>
>
>> On 13-Jul-16 15:28, matthew shears wrote:
>>
>> Completely agree with Greg.
>>
>>
>>> On 13/07/2016 19:58, Greg Shatan 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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>
>>> [mailto: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
>>> <mailto: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
>>> <mailto: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
>>> <mailto: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
>>
>> --
>>
>> --------------
>> Matthew Shears
>> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
>> + 44 771 2472987
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list