[CCWG-ACCT] [bylaws-coord] Lawyers Comments and Concerns re CCWG Comment - Version 2

Fri May 13 12:13:10 UTC 2016

+ 1

On 5/13/2016 1:04 PM, James Gannon wrote:
> I agree
>
> jg
>
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf 
> of León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx 
> <mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>>
> Date: Friday 13 May 2016 at 13:01
> To: Thomas Rickert <thomas at rickert.net <mailto:thomas at rickert.net>>
> Cc: ICANN-Adler <ICANN at adlercolvin.com 
> <mailto:ICANN at adlercolvin.com>>, Accountability Cross Community 
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>, Sidley ICANN CCWG 
> <sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com <mailto:sidleyicannccwg at sidley.com>>, 
> "ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>" 
> <ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>>, "bylaws-coord at icann.org 
> <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>" <bylaws-coord at icann.org 
> <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [bylaws-coord] Lawyers Comments and Concerns 
> re CCWG Comment - Version 2
>
> My understanding too
>
> Saludos,
>
>
> León
>
> El may 13, 2016, a las 2:37 AM, Thomas Rickert <thomas at rickert.net 
> <mailto:thomas at rickert.net>> escribió:
>
>> That is my understanding, yes!
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>> Thomas Rickert
>> Rechtsanwalt
>> tel:+49.228.74 898.0
>> fax:+49.228.74 898.66
>> email:thomas at rickert.net <mailto:thomas at rickert.net>
>> web:rickert.net <https://rickert.net/>
>> 		
>> image
>>
>> RICKERT Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm)
>> Kaiserplatz 7 - 9, 53113 Bonn, Germany
>> HRB 9262, AG Bonn - GF/CEO: Thomas Rickert
>>
>>> Am 13.05.2016 um 08:37 schrieb Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr 
>>> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> So, to be clear, what is requested here is to add the following 
>>> sentence at the end of item 2.3 :
>>> As a consequence, our group’s recommendation is to remove provisions 
>>> B, C, D and  E of Section 1.1 (d)(ii).
>>> Is that correct ?
>>> Best
>>> Mathieu
>>> **
>>> **
>>> **
>>> **
>>> *De :*bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org>[mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org]*De 
>>> la part de*Greg Shatan
>>> *Envoyé :*jeudi 12 mai 2016 21:28
>>> *À :*Gregory, Holly
>>> *Cc :*ICANN-Adler;accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>; Sidley ICANN 
>>> CCWG;ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>;bylaws-coord at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>; Seun Ojedeji
>>> *Objet :*Re: [bylaws-coord] [CCWG-ACCT] Lawyers Comments and 
>>> Concerns re CCWG Comment - Version 2
>>> I think this reflects an issue in the drafting process for the 
>>> comment, which resulted in several less-than-perfect translations of 
>>> the CCWG's decisions into the draft comment.  That's why we have an 
>>> iterative process of review and comment, since we can't all be part 
>>> of the process where the words are first being put on the "page" 
>>> (screen).  It would be a mistake to take the draft comment as 
>>> gospel. This is not to impugn the efforts of those involved.  We are 
>>> all running hard and fast, and that means that you have to circle 
>>> back and fix something a little more often than if you were in a 
>>> relaxed work mode.
>>> Greg
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Gregory, Holly 
>>> <holly.gregory at sidley.com <mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> We reiterate:  if the instruction is to remove the language then the 
>>> recommendation should be to remove the language.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent with Good (www.good.com <http://www.good.com/>)
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:*Seun Ojedeji
>>> *Sent:*Thursday, May 12, 2016 12:55:29 PM
>>> *To:*Andrew Sullivan
>>> *Cc:*Rosemary E. Fei; Thomas Rickert;ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>;bylaws-coord at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>; Sidley ICANN 
>>> CCWG;accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>; ICANN-Adler
>>>
>>> *Subject:*Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Lawyers Comments and Concerns re CCWG 
>>> Comment - Version 2
>>>
>>> +1 but it's certainly the Chair's call to communicate the needful to 
>>> the legal team.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Sent from my LG G4
>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>>
>>> On 12 May 2016 17:27, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com 
>>> <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote:
>>> Thanks.  FWIW, I certainly think the text should say, "Remove this."
>>>
>>> A
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 04:25:18PM +0000, Rosemary E. Fei wrote:
>>> > Dear All:
>>> >
>>> > I have to second Holly's response here.  I, too, read the 
>>> recommendation in the CCWG's draft public comment, and wondered why 
>>> it didn't just say "remove".  If it had, we would not have asked for 
>>> clarification.  What we did not understand, and what was obscure to 
>>> us, was why that was not the recommendation, given the content of 
>>> the rest of the comment.
>>> >
>>> > To be clear, we have no objection on legal grounds to removing the 
>>> items of concern from grandfathering, as long as that is what the 
>>> CCWG agrees should be done.
>>> >
>>> > Rosemary
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com 
>>> <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>]
>>> > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:58 AM
>>> > To: Holly Gregory
>>> > Cc: 'leonfelipe at sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>'; 
>>> 'Mathieu Weill'; 'thomas at rickert.net <mailto:thomas at rickert.net>'; 
>>> ICANN-Adler; 'accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>'; Sidley ICANN 
>>> CCWG; 'ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:ccwg-accountability5 at icann.org>'; 'bylaws-coord at icann.org 
>>> <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>'
>>> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Lawyers Comments and Concerns re CCWG 
>>> Comment - Version 2
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > On comment 2 in this comments-on-the-comment document, it says this:
>>> >
>>> >     Lawyers’ comment: What is the recommendation and what direction is
>>> >     the CCWG-Accountability providing to the legal drafters? In our
>>> >     May 7, 2016 comments on the draft CCWG-Accountability comment
>>> >     letter, we suggested a recommendation: “We request that the groups
>>> >     most directly involved with the documents addressed in subsections
>>> >     (B) through (E) weigh in on the need to include grandfathering
>>> >     language for those documents. Depending on such input, a final
>>> >     determination should be made as to whether those documents should
>>> >     be included in the grandfathering provision.”
>>> >
>>> > I don't get what's obscure here.  The CCWG's comment is that the 
>>> mentioned subsections have no justification in the CCWG Proposal.
>>> > There's precisely one thing to do in such a case: remove the 
>>> subsection.  It would be helpful, at least to me, to understand why 
>>> the drafters do not understand this.
>>> >
>>> > The time for substantive change to the Proposal is over.  If the 
>>> Proposal has deficiencies, we will have to cope with them later.  
>>> The task is to implement the Proposal in bylaws language, and that's it.
>>> > Anything not founded in either the Proposal or the facts of 
>>> relevant law is not something that should appear in any changed 
>>> bylaws text.
>>> > The community consensus must be treated as fundamental, or all 
>>> legitimacy of this process will be lost.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> >
>>> > A
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Andrew Sullivan
>>> >ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew Sullivan
>>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=AKn_gzAS4ANpCEqx2GjPwjUkqYPHaN7m0NQNyfQXAgk&m=qsVVNEijGn5VaSFaMoL5f0pKfzUx8abcOUMCW3IEwuU&s=zj8D6f4Ukj094yM3OECPlWe5yu_75aj3WArq7NCf8BE&e=>
>>>
>>> ****************************************************************************************************
>>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that 
>>> is privileged or confidential.
>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and 
>>> any attachments and notify us
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> ****************************************************************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bylaws-coord mailing list
>> bylaws-coord at icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160513/e03c1b58/attachment-0001.html>