[council] Prague - please read!

Fri May 11 18:44:04 UTC 2012

To follow up Mary’s e-mail, here is the reconsideration request she is referring to.  I agree the IGOs should be on the GAC discussion (though not sure the reconsideration request is of any relevance to the GAC).

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs

From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 2:07 PM
Cc: GNSO Council List
Subject: Re: [council] Prague - please read!

Hi, Thomas' list looks good (though I should say I've not consulted NCSG colleagues and members so this is a somewhat personal view).

For the Board, I assume our concerns center on transparency as well as effective communication. Do we want to ask them what else they are considering - whether in relation to changing formats or duration of ICANN meetings, or in holding different types of meetings (per the budget) - that the GNSO can provide input on?

For the GAC, do we want to discuss their views on the IGO issue, especially as the IOC has just submitted a Request for Reconsideration of the Board's recent decision not to change the AGB?

Cheers
Mary

Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu<mailto:mary.wong at law.unh.edu>
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>>>
From:

Thomas Rickert <rickert at anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>>

To:

Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder at indom.com<mailto:stephane.vangelder at indom.com>>

CC:

GNSO Council List <council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:council at gnso.icann.org>>

Date:

5/11/2012 5:10 AM

Subject:

Re: [council] Prague - please read!

Stéphane,
I would like to discuss with the Board how ICANN's communication could be improved in the light of Fridays, URS and the TAS Glitch.

For GAC I would like to discuss in what areas the GAC might wish to co-operate with the GNSO so we can prepare / plan resources.
Also I would like to discuss with the GAC at a high level (if possible) how the Council and the GAC can help manage expectations of both the public bodies (especially LEA) and industry when it comes to fighting abuse.

With the ccNSO I guess it would make sense to pick up the discussion what effects the huge number of registries might have on our work and structure now that we know we should expect something in the range of 2k new TLDs.

In response to your question no. 2, there should be some time reserved for internal discussion in preparation of above subjects - should the Council decide to pick up these ideas.

Thanks,
Thomas

Am 11.05.2012 um 10:05 schrieb Stéphane Van Gelder:

Councillors,

I would like to strongly request your help in coming up with two things in preparation for our Prague week:

1. Topics for our interactions with the Board/GAC and ccNSO and
2. Ideas for sessions for our work weekend.

As added context, I should say that the Council leadership is under greater pressure than usual to provide this earlier than usual (Staff have been put under pressure due to the delay in publishing the CR agenda that people complained about there).

I should also add that I have asked Jeff, who has kindly volunteered (or was kindly volunteered by me, whichever way you want to see it ;) ) to look after our Prague agenda, to ensure that we cut down on pure working lunch sessions. I find these sessions are an organizational nightmare as people need time to have their lunch, which cost down on the time afforded to the topic we are scheduled to work on.

So in short, please make a greater effort than usual to provide ideas for 1 and 2 above. These sessions, both our interactions with other groups and our own working sessions, should be the result of Council-wide deliberations so that they are truly effective and have greater meaning for the Council as a whole.

Thanks for your help in this endeavor.

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
----------------
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT

___________________________________________________________
Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt
Schollmeyer &  Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm)
Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert
HRB 9262, AG Bonn

Büro / Office Bonn:
Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0

Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.:
Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56

Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66

mailto: rickert at anwaelte.de<mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>
skype-id: trickert
web: www.anwaelte.de<http://www.anwaelte.de>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20120511/979e6c31/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IOC Reconsideration Request - Resolution 2012.04.10.NG5 - 5_10_12.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 32391 bytes
Desc: IOC Reconsideration Request - Resolution 2012.04.10.NG5 - 5_10_12.pdf
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20120511/979e6c31/IOCReconsiderationRequest-Resolution2012.04.10.NG5-5_10_12.pdf>