[council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter Drafting Team

Mary Wong MWong at piercelaw.edu
Mon Feb 1 22:18:59 UTC 2010


Thanks to Liz and Chuck for their clarifications and suggestions.
 
I agree that the DT should be reasonably small, and would in this case
personally prefer not to set numbers for each SG/SO/AC, or worry about
matching/equivalence. In other situations and over other issues, equal
representation of each group may be a fundamental concern, but in this
case I believe NCSG is recommending Avri and Milton not because we
believe we (or everyone) needs at least two (or however many)
representatives. Rather, and for the reasons that Bill has stated, Avri
and Milton will best represent NCSG in terms of what is likely to be a
difficult preliminary issue (i.e. scoping out the WG). 
 
Cheers
Mary
 
 
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
(SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584


>>> 


From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>
To:"William Drake" <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
CC:Glen de Saint Géry<Glen at icann.org>, "GNSO Council List"
<council at gnso.icann.org>
Date: 2/1/2010 4:33 PM
Subject: RE: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter
Drafting Team
I wouldn't see any problem with that.  I just think it would be best to
keep it as small as reasonably possible because of the short timeframe
and limited task.  If the CSG wants three to cover three constituencies,
would you want three?  (BTW, they have not asked for three.)
 
Chuck



From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 4:28 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter
Drafting Team

Chuck, 

Two.  There are some fundamental issues in the air about the proper
scope and terms of reference for the WG that need to be sorted out by
the DT.  Even if NCSG were to resolve its internal differences on these
points, there would probably still be differences between the houses
once the discussion gets to specifics. We're dealing with a rather
variable geometry of perspectives, and as I say both people mentioned
will add to working these things through.

Best,

Bill

On Feb 1, 2010, at 10:09 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:



Bill,
 
How many do you think the NCSG needs for the charter drafting team, not
for the WG.
 
Chuck



From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 3:59 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] Volunteer for Vertical Integration PDP Charter
Drafting Team

Hi 

And from NCSG, Avri Doria and Milton Mueller.  

One participant from each SG would not work for NCSG, as we have a
couple of contending perspectives in play, with multiple members aligned
with each.  Avri and Milton have been very active and thoughtful
proponents of those respective perspectives, both of which
overlap/synergize in some ways with the positions advanced by other SGs.
 Should be an interesting discussion...

Best,

Bill


On Feb 1, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:



Glen,
 
Please add Brian Cute from Afilias to this DT.
 
Thanks, Chuck
 





***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20100201/dc8fc1cb/attachment.html>


More information about the council mailing list