[council] Draft letter to the Board on closed generics dialogue
Stephanie E Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Tue Apr 26 13:38:20 UTC 2022
Strongly support Manju's clarification. Folks, you do not have to
support our view, you just have to support our right to express it clearly.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2022-04-25 9:19 p.m., 陳曼茹 Manju Chen via council wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not sure which version we're checking now, but I want to point out
> that the version I see, where it says 'the NCSG expressed its
> opposition to the conversation between the Council and the GAC_*on
> this subject*_' is inaccurate.
>
> As we have repeatedly stated, it's not the subject of the dialogue we
> oppose, but the approach initiated by the Board.
> I strongly opposed the edits as it mischaracterize NCSG's position and
> reasons for objection.
>
> I would suggest we just keep the sentence as it was, better if we add
> a line of clarification:
> While the Council is willing to pursue these next steps, it is
> important to note that Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group expressed its
> opposition to the approach. The NCSG will communicate directly to the
> Board regarding the rationale of their opposition.
>
> Many thanks,
> Manju
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 7:40 AM Justine Chew via council
> <council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Philippe,
>
> Thank you for taking on board my suggestion -- what you have
> included in your version 4 at the end of para 3 works for me.
>
> Best,
> Justine
> *
> *
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 00:45, <philippe.fouquart at orange.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Paul, you might indeed, you might :) I have the same
> impression of there being nothing controversial in these
> changes, but they provide useful context, hence the suggested
> inclusion.
>
> I should have said shorter, in fact, rather than concise.
>
> Best,
>
> Philippe
>
> Orange Restricted
>
> *From:* McGrady, Jr., Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 25, 2022 6:31 PM
> *To:* FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>; Justine Chew
> <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>; council at gnso icann. org
> <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Cc:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; Kurt Pritz
> <kurt at kjpritz.com>; GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [council] Draft letter to the Board on closed
> generics dialogue
>
> Thanks Phillippe. Since Justine didn’t express what the ALAC
> did not like about my proposed enhancements, and since being
> concise means “brief but *comprehensive*”, might I _cheekily_
> suggest that my very modest changes resulted in the more
> concise version since I really do believe that some of the
> framing in your initial draft didn’t contain all of the
> necessary information needed for the Board to understand where
> we are coming from on this. Nothing I included should be
> controversial.
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> *From:*philippe.fouquart at orange.com
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 25, 2022 11:24 AM
> *To:* Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>; McGrady,
> Jr., Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>; council at gnso icann. org
> <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Cc:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; Kurt Pritz
> <kurt at kjpritz.com>; GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [council] Draft letter to the Board on closed
> generics dialogue
>
> [EXTERNAL MESSAGE]
>
> [responding to Justine’s email that followed Paul’s]
>
> Dear Councilors,
>
> Paul’s suggestions seem to be essentially quoting the letter
> and framing paper – however, if like Justine below, some
> councilors would consider that context to be unnecessary or
> restrictive, let the list know, (and if so, for ease of
> editing and given the time constraint we’d revert back to the
> previous - more concise - version)
>
> @Justine <mailto:justine.chew.icann at gmail.com> I’ve slightly
> reworded your other suggestion to make it sound less
> one-directional, at the risk of stating the obvious. Hope
> that’ll work.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Philippe
>
> *From:* Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 25, 2022 10:36 AM
> *To:* McGrady, Jr., Paul D. <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>; FOUQUART
> Philippe INNOV/NET <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>
> *Cc:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; Kurt Pritz
> <kurt at kjpritz.com>; GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [council] Draft letter to the Board on closed
> generics dialogue
>
> Hello Paul,
>
> I think the simpler version 2 of the draft reply with
> amendments as proposed by Philippe regarding references to (a)
> NCSG's letter and (b) "modalities" is sufficient for the
> present purposes.
>
> Hello Philippe,
>
> My 3rd point was a suggestion to indicate that Council is
> undertaking some thinking for the dialogue, so, perhaps
> something along the lines of the following could be
> considered? While I won't insist on it, I think it's useful to
> provide some context on the timing of this response.
>
> /It is on that basis that the Council is willing to pursue
> next steps for the facilitated dialogue, subject to mutual
> agreement with the GAC on the conditions _which the
> Council is preparing to propose_ for that dialogue./
>
>
> Thanks,
> Justine
>
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 at 04:11, McGrady, Jr., Paul D.
> <PMcGrady at taftlaw.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Philippe, Kurt, Justine, and Jeff.
>
> Dear All:
>
> I’m happy with the NCSG’s letter being attached, or not,
> but I do think it is important to at least call it out
> since we don’t want to give the misimpression that the
> Council is completely unified on this topic. I for one
> have a *_great deal of sympathy_* with the idea that GAC
> advice should not restart policy work in the GNSO, but
> rather the Board needs to figure out how to implement (via
> IRT) both the completed policy Recommendations and the GAC
> advice in the next version of the Applicant Guidebook
> (like they did with much of the GAC advice that rolled in
> after the policy work was done for the first round).
> Hopefully something will come out of this dialogue that
> helps in that process.
>
> As for the letter itself, I think we could just as easily
> say “Dear Board, of course we are happy to talk with the
> GAC about their concerns. We will reach out to them and
> get it set up.” But, we do like our letters here in
> ICANNland, so my marked up version (based off the last
> version sent by Philippe) is attached. If we are going to
> frame the issues, instead of just a quick “we are on it”
> response, I think a tiny bit of more detail of how we got
> here makes sense. Hopefully my proposed changes (which
> are in red on my screen) will be viewed as friendly
> amendments, which is the spirit in which they are offered.
>
> Thank all!
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
> *Taft*
>
>
>
> * /*
>
>
>
> *Paul D. McGrady, Jr.*
> Partner
> PMcGrady at taftlaw.com <mailto:PMcGrady at taftlaw.com>
> Dir: 312.836.4094 | Cell: 312.882.5020
> Tel: 312.527.4000 | Fax: 312.754.2354
> 111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2800
> Chicago, Illinois 60601-3713
>
>
> *Download vCard
> <http://www.taftlaw.com/vcard/PMcGrady@taftlaw.com>*
> *taftlaw.com <http://www.taftlaw.com>*
>
> This message may contain information that is
> attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or
> otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended
> recipient, use and disclosure of this message are
> prohibited. If you received this transmission in error,
> please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the
> message and any attachments.
>
> Orange Restricted
>
> *From:*council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> *On Behalf
> Of *philippe.fouquart--- via council
> *Sent:* Friday, April 22, 2022 1:57 PM
> *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>; Justine Chew
> <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>; Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com>
> *Cc:* GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>; council at gnso icann.
> org <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [council] Draft letter to the Board on
> closed generics dialogue
>
> [EXTERNAL MESSAGE]
>
> Kurt, Justine, Jeff, thanks for the inputs.
>
> On 1) and reference to the NCSG’s letter: The reference is
> on record with the minutes, and can also be found in the
> Council list archive, I don’t think there’s any risk this
> goes unnoticed, I’d suggest we simply say While the
> Council is willing to pursue these next steps, it is
> important to note that Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group
> expressed its opposition to the approach.
>
> Manju (since it is you who spoke on this during our call):
> would you be fine with this?
>
> On 2) and modalities, I’d suggest we go for Jeff’s edits
> and simply say in the second paragraph:
>
> The Council is appreciative of the ICANN Board’s attention
> to GNSO related matters and is willing to pursue next
> steps for the facilitated dialogue, subject to mutual
> agreement with the GAC on the conditions for that dialogue.
>
> Ironically, in French, the equivalent of ‘modalities’ has
> a sense of a series of menial tasks that the authors would
> consider a) quite straightforward and b) as a result,
> generally not worth doing by themselves. Neither of which
> would probably be true here I think.
>
> It seems 2) alleviates the need to elaborate as, Justine,
> you suggested with your 3^rd point but let us know if it
> doesn’t work.
>
> As attached with diff marks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Philippe
>
> *From:*Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, April 22, 2022 3:48 PM
> *To:* Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>; Kurt
> Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com>; FOUQUART Philippe INNOV/NET
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>
> *Cc:* GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>; council at gnso icann.
> org <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject:* RE: [council] Draft letter to the Board on
> closed generics dialogue
>
> I strongly urge that the letter from the NCSG is not
> included with this letter. As Justine states, there are
> some mischaracterizations in that letter and as far as I
> am aware the rest of the Council does not agree with the
> opinions expressed by the NCSG. You can indicate that the
> NCSG opposed the meeting in the letter without any
> attachments. If you include the NCSG letter, would you
> consider adding letters from the other SGs and Cs that are
> in support of the meeting? I believe the best way is to
> note the NCSG’s disagreement, but not attach anything.
>
> And with respect to the word “modalities”, it is an
> unnecessary word. A “modality” is a condition is it not?
> So I would just state: “….that the Council is willing to
> pursue next steps for the facilitated dialogue, subject to
> mutual agreement with the GAC on the conditions for that
> dialogue.”
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>
> Founder & CEO
>
> JJN Solutions, LLC
>
> p: +1.202.549.5079
>
> E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com <mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
>
> http://jjnsolutions.com <http://jjnsolutions.com>
>
> *From:*council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> *On Behalf
> Of *Justine Chew via council
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 21, 2022 8:12 PM
> *To:* Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com>; Philippe Fouquart
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>
> *Cc:* GNSO Secs <gnso-secs at icann.org>; council at gnso icann.
> org <council at gnso.icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [council] Draft letter to the Board on
> closed generics dialogue
>
> Hello Philippe, Kurt,
>
> 1. I agree with Kurt on the NCSG letter, and if it were to
> be included, I think we should at least address the
> assertion that "GAC has been silent since 2013 on the
> matter of Closed Generics" as called out by Jeff as a
> mis-characterization of the GAC on the part of NCSG.
>
>
> 2. I understand the word "modalities" to mean "ways of
> doing something", but if there's a better word to address
> Kurt's concerns then by all means, let's consider that.
>
> 3. Would it be feasible to add to the end of the second
> paragraph, a suggestion that "the conditions and
> modalities for that dialogue" will be forthcoming? That
> would indicate that Council is giving thought to those and
> will continue to do so (hence allowing for the Closed
> Generics small team leeway to do its work).
>
> Thanks for considering.
>
> Kind regards,
> Justine
>
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 at 06:54, Kurt Pritz via council
> <council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Philippe:
>
> Two comments:
>
> 1. If the NCSG has requested that reference to their
> comment should be included it in the letter, then we
> should include it. If not, you might ask if they want
> that (and if they do, include it). I don’t think it
> adds value at this point — but will add value as we
> get into the meeting set-up, the discussion scope, and
> the actions taken with any recommendations that come
> out of the meeting.
>
> 2. I personally recommend that we avoid the use of the
> term ‘modalities.’ I don’t know what it means and, if
> participating in a group tasked with identifying them,
> I wouldn’t know what they are. I right clicked on the
> word and found that Microsoft knows of no synonyms. I
> looked it up in a popular online dictionary and came
> up with:
>
> — the quality or state of being modal; a modal
> quality or attribute;
>
> — the classification of logical
> propositions according to their asserting or
> denying the possibility,
> impossibility, contingency, or necessity of their
> content;
>
> — one of the main avenues of sensation (such as
> vision);
>
> — a usually physical therapeutic agency
>
> Not getting the sense from there, I looked for its use
> in a sentence and found:
>
> "Ineluctable modality of the visible: at least
> that if no more, thought through my eyes.” /The
> New Yorker, 7 Feb. 2022/
>
> That did not help me understand the definition but did
> tell me a lot about the kind of people that use the
> word. I understand the word is commonly used in
> governmental settings but we needn’t adopt the custom
> if it is not clarifying or helpful.
>
> Slightly more seriously, when we meet among ourselves
> and with the GAC, we should all understand the target
> and “modalities” seems too broad. It would be helpful
> for me (maybe it is just me) to replace the word with
> commonly spoken terms or to parenthetically define it.
>
> Thanks for listening,
>
> Kurt
>
> On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:32 AM, philippe.fouquart---
> via council <council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Councilors,
>
> Please find attached for you review a draft
> response letter to the ICANN Board on closed
> generics. It intends to capture the conclusions of
> our discussion during the Council call last week.
>
> We would like to have it ready for the Board
> workshop next week, so please have a look before
> April 27th 1200 UTC (Wednesday)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Philippe
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir
> des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees
> et ne doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans
> autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par
> erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces
> jointes. Les messages electroniques etant
> susceptibles d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message
> a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain
> confidential or privileged information that may be
> protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied
> without authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please
> notify the sender and delete this message and its
> attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for
> messages that have been modified, changed or
> falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> <Closed Generics_Council to ICANN Board - 20 April
> 2022.docx>_______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to
> the processing of your personal data for purposes
> of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the
> website Terms of Service
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit
> the Mailman link above to change your membership
> status or configuration, including unsubscribing,
> setting digest-style delivery or disabling
> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
> processing of your personal data for purposes of
> subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the
> ICANN Privacy Policy
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website
> Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos).
> You can visit the Mailman link above to change your
> membership status or configuration, including
> unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
> and so on.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des
> informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent
> donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation.
> Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces
> jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles
> d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete
> altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential
> or privileged information that may be protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without
> authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please notify
> the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for
> messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des
> informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si
> vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes.
> Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete
> altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
> privileged information that may be protected by law;
>
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without
> authorisation.
>
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> sender and delete this message and its attachments.
>
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages
> that have been modified, changed or falsified.
>
> Thank you.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing
> list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the
> Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
> delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
> and so on.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20220426/5cb2ab70/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9063 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20220426/5cb2ab70/image001-0001.png>
More information about the council
mailing list