[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
Niels ten Oever
lists at nielstenoever.net
Thu Jul 14 22:33:08 UTC 2016
Agreed. But this brings the question: who selects when (and how) this
scarce good will be used (to balance remaining effective, independent
and limit costs).
On 07/14/2016 11:53 PM, Drazek, Keith wrote:
> Agreed. Access to independent legal advice was never in question.
>
>
>
> That said, in the interest of controlling costs, I have no problem
> seeking input from ICANN’s internal lawyers on issues that are deemed
> non-contentious or where potential conflicts do not exist.
>
>
>
> I am obligated to report that the Registries Stakeholder Group is very,
> very concerned about the cost of legal fees from WS1 and wants to ensure
> the CCWG is efficient with its future spending. I know we’re developing
> cost-control mechanisms for WS2, and I’ve advised my SG accordingly, but
> this will continue to receive attention from the RySG.
>
>
>
> Holly’s question and the response about budgeting vis-à-vis ICANN’s
> outside counsel was instructive. Any and all outside counsel expenses
> will require certification.
>
>
>
> So, let me reiterate my view…the CCWG must have access to independent
> legal advice. We must ensure costs are controlled and resources are used
> efficiently. If that means selectively turning to ICANN’s lawyers on
> occasion, I can and do support that, but not at the expense of our
> ability to seek independent advice.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Keith
>
>
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Phil Corwin
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 14, 2016 5:34 PM
> *To:* Matthew Shears; Greg Shatan; Robin Gross
> *Cc:* Accountability Cross Community
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>
>
>
> Access to independent legal advice for WS2 issues is fundamental and
> should be non-negotiable
>
>
>
> Use your power, Empowered Community
>
>
>
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> Virtualaw LLC
> 1155 F Street NW
> Suite 1050
> Washington, DC 20004
> 202-559-8597/Direct
> 202-559-8750/Fax
> 202-255-6172/Cell
>
> Twitter: @VlawDC
>
> "Luck is the residue of design" --- Branch Rickey
>
> *From:*mshears at cdt.org
>
> *Sent:*July 14, 2016 5:26 PM
>
> *To:*gregshatanipc at gmail.com; robin at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
>
> *Cc:*accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>
> *Subject:*Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Agenda CCWG ACCT Meeting - 12 July
> 2016 @ 20:00 UTC
>
>
>
> + 1 well said Robin.
>
>
>
> On 14/07/2016 03:20, Greg Shatan wrote:
>
> Robin,
>
>
>
> Agree 100%.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>> wrote:
>
> It is simply a non-starter to suggest that CCWG would lose its right
> to independent counsel at this stage. I am struggling to understand
> *where* the suggestion to start this debate all over again even came
> from. We have very important issues on our agenda for WorkStream 2
> that require independence of legal advice: transparency of board
> deliberations, reforming the DIDP, the CEP, etc., which all involve
> trying to reform the policies that were created by the in-house
> legal dept. It is silly to suggest that we must seek the legal
> advice from those who created the policies we are trying to reform
> as that would be counter-productive to our goals.
>
> Additionally it was revealed in yesterday’s calls, that ICANN’s
> legal dept fees will be added to the CCWG’s independent fees, so
> CCWG will be billed for the in-house efforts to resist our reforms
> (and we won’t be given access to the legal advice that we would be
> paying for). I think it is extremely important the legal fees NOT
> be conflated together. We need to understand what the separate
> costs are, and we cannot be held responsible for spending on Jones
> Day that is outside of our control. Fees that ICANN corporate
> undertakes must be separated from fees that CCWG undertakes or the
> proposed budget process makes absolutely no sense, unless it was
> intended to tie CCWG’s hands and give ICANN corporate a blank check
> to spend resisting our reforms.
>
> This is an important issue that we cannot roll over on, or
> everything else we try to do from here on out will be of
> questionable value. This settled debate should not be re-opened,
> despite the huge win for ICANN corporate if were to succeed in
> over-turning this group’s previous decision on this critical matter
> of independence of legal advice.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
>
> > On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:06 PM, Niels ten Oever
> <lists at nielstenoever.net> wrote:
> >
> > Also +1 to Greg and +1 to James
> >
> > On 07/13/2016 10:50 PM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina wrote:
> >> Thanks, Greg. +1. Fully agree.
> >>
> >> CCWG shall retain the ability to ask for independent advice. Also
> agree
> >> that continuing with Sidley Austin and Adler & Colvin is the best
> option.
> >>
> >> + 1 also to James previous email about not reopening the debate.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Tanya
> >>
> >>
> >> On 13/07/16 22:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
> >>> Siva,
> >>>
> >>> The reasons are all in the record. Please go back and read all
> of the
> >>> materials and discussions relating to our desire and choice to hire
> >>> independent counsel. If you have any specific questions after that,
> >>> please ask them.
> >>>
> >>> I will briefly say the following:
> >>>
> >>> 1. This has nothing to do with competence, although being generally
> >>> competent and competent in a specific area are two different things.
> >>>
> >>> 2. Where we needed first-hand knowledge or history, we've turned to
> >>> ICANN legal as one source for such things. That won't change.
> Advice
> >>> is another thing entirely.
> >>>
> >>> 3. Ask yourself "Who is ICANN legal's client?" and you will have
> >>> answered your own question.
> >>>
> >>> Greg
> >>>
> >>> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Greg,
> >>>
> >>> How valid are your assumptions? What are the reasons for this
> >>> unwillingness to make use of ICANN Legal, who are competent, have
> >>> first hand knowledge and a complete understanding of the legal
> >>> nuances on matters concerning ICANN, may I ask? Saves money on
> >>> most matters requiring legal advice, and should there be areas
> >>> that require specialized advice, we could seek external advice.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Greg Shatan
> >>> <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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 reason
> >>> s
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>
> >>>
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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/
> >>> <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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
> >>>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
> >>>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sivasubramanian M
> <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Niels ten Oever
> > Head of Digital
> >
> > Article 19
> > www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
> >
> > PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
> > 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> <mailto: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>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4613/12558 - Release Date: 07/04/16
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
--
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital
Article 19
www.article19.org
PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list