[council] ICANN's Legislative/Regulatory Tracker -- Recommended Improvements

Thu Apr 11 09:56:16 UTC 2019

Michele - Absolutely, and I supported his approach but I don't expect a
successful outcome. Best, Erika

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 11:44 AM Michele Neylon - Blacknight <
michele at blacknight.com> wrote:

> Erika
>
>
>
> Sure, but I think the point Carlos was trying to make is that we and ICANN
> should be leveraging the resources we already have. The GAC should be one.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Michele
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://www.blacknight.com/
>
> https://blacknight.blog/
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
>
> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
>
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
>
>
> *From: *council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Erika Mann <
> erika at erikamann.com>
> *Date: *Thursday 11 April 2019 at 10:30
> *To: *Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se>
> *Cc: *"gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>, "GNSO Council List (
> council at gnso.icann.org)" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [council] ICANN's Legislative/Regulatory Tracker --
> Recommended Improvements
>
>
>
> I don't mind Carlos, but keep in mind, DNA related legislative challenges
> are often embedded in legislation that don't appear to carry such risks.
>
> Erika
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 8:59 PM Carlos Raul Gutierrez <
> carlosraul at gutierrez.se> wrote:
>
> Let's start with a short survey to all GAC participants during ICANN65,
> to test their level of involvement with their local legislation relating to
> the DNS. We may get some leads.....
>
> Thanks! Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>
>
>
> El 10 abr. 2019 7:27, Erika Mann <erika at erikamann.com> escribió:
>
> Carlos - we can add the GAC to the list as an important partner but I
> doubt many will be able in alerting ICANN about potentially problematic
> legislations they're or their parliaments are drafting. In many cases they
> will not even know. For example, I'm doubtful that the European Parliament,
> the European Commission or European Member States are aware about
> potentially - for the domain sector - problematic aspects of the copyright
> law they recently all supported.
>
> Erika
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:26 PM Carlos Raul Gutierrez <
> carlosraul at gutierrez.se> wrote:
>
> A lot of good ideas but I don't see the GAC in any of those. The most
> probable source or shapping force of any initiative that may be closely
> related and affect the DNS is sitting in the next room at every meeting.
> What about asking them?
>
> Thanks! Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>
>
>
> El 10 abr. 2019 4:01, Erika Mann <erika at erikamann.com> escribió:
>
> Keith, All -
>
>
>
> I believe the current format and information gathering practice (
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/legislative-regulatory-30jan19-en.pdf)  is
> not sufficient and would therefore recommend few things:
>
>    - ICANN ORG should work with a professional firm in receiving regular
>    updates (monitoring report) about regulatory issues that cause concern
>
> ·
>
>    - To make such a Monitoring Report (MR) not too expensive
>
> o
>
>    - ICANN should focus on few regions, regions that cause the majority
>          of concerns
>          - Monitoring reports should be received 4 times/year
>          - Early warning notes should be received as quickly as possible
>
>
>    - The current Crowed Sourced Tracking Report should remain as an
>    additional information source
>    https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/legislative-regulatory-30jan19-en.pdf
>    - I agree with Paul that it is key "CANN’s government relations folks
>    to visit us at Council and highlight the main issues it sees heading our
>    way"
>    - I agree with Flip, the list of topics that should be monitored need
>    to be broadened
>    - I agree with Ayden to some degree but recommend to focus on few
>    aspect "ICANN should monitor 1) the impact the law/regulation/directive has
>    had as it relates to ICANN's remit" and, once a legislation is introduced,
>    ICANN must do a compliance assessment. I don't believe that lobbying
>    strategies should be broadly discussed in the community.
>    - I agree with Martin, the Crowed Sourced Tracking Report should
>    cooperate with existing Regional Intelligence Tracking Reports.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Erika
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:35 PM Drazek, Keith via council <
> council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
>
> Ayden, Darcy, Erika, Flip, Michele, Phillipe and Tatiana:
>
>
>
> During our GNSO Working Session in Kobe, the seven of you volunteered to
> help develop GNSO Council recommendations for improvements to ICANN’s
> current Legislative/Regulatory tracking effort.
>
>
>
> As we discussed, ICANN’s work in this area is relatively new and still
> evolving, and we have an opportunity to engage with Theresa’s group to help
> shape their approach to ensure it is applicable to our policy work and
> process management responsibilities. While their work product is currently
> a spreadsheet, I recall we agreed it needs to go much deeper in analysis
> and demonstrate a predictive capability for where future or existing
> regulations impact GNSO policies, in effect now or under future development.
>
>
>
> Please work together and with Staff to help kick off this important and
> timely work.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190411/61a7f05f/attachment.html>