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

[Greg Shatan]

I also believe the recommendation of the CCWG was to remove subsections
B-E.  We did have representatives (or at least members) of the directly
affected communities (i.e., numbers and protocols) on the call and they
concurred in this recommendation.

Greg

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Schaefer, Brett <
Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org> wrote:

> I agree with Andrew.
>
> __________
>
>
> ________________________________
> Brett Schaefer
> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org<http://heritage.org/>
>
> On May 12, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory at sidley.com
> <mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com>> wrote:
>
>
> The Recommendation does not currently say "remove."  If that is what CCWG
> wants, then the Recommendation should say so.  We are seeking clarity about
> what the CCWG recommendation is.
>
>
>
> Sent with Good (www.good.com<http://www.good.com>)
>
> ________________________________
> From: Andrew Sullivan
> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 09:58:15 AM
> To: Gregory, Holly
> Cc: 'leonfelipe at sanchez.mx<mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>'; 'Mathieu
> Weill'; 'thomas at rickert.net<mailto:thomas at rickert.net>'; '
> ICANN at adlercolvin.com<mailto:ICANN at adlercolvin.com>'; '
> 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>
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
> 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bylaws-coord/attachments/20160512/af6819fb/attachment-0001.html>