[CWG-Stewardship] CWG Position on IANA IPR

[Gomes, Chuck]

I don't have strong feelings on this Jonathan.  I just know that everyone is concerned about timing so I thought it might be good to state that we plan to do whatever is necessary to avoid delays.

Chuck

From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 11:01 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG Position on IANA IPR

Chuck,

Thank-you. That's a good point. It's not something Lise & I have explicitly discussed.

I suppose that, from a CWG perspective, we could start work on at any time but my sense was that we would pick this up after the ICG completed its work.
I am not certain we need to specifically spell it out here. Do you (or others) have a view on this?

More generally, the CWG's role in implementation (of our proposal) is something we could also usefully discuss at some point.

Jonathan



From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes at verisign.com]
Sent: 26 August 2015 12:30
To: jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>; cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG Position on IANA IPR

Jonathan & Lise,

This looks good to me but I wonder whether we should say something about timing targets in the last paragraph.

Chuck

From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 3:25 AM
To: cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>
Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] CWG Position on IANA IPR

All,

You will recall that at the August 20th meeting of the CWG,  the following action arose:


Action: Chairs draft position for submission to ICG and relevant communities.

Please see below for such a draft.

Please provide any comments with 24 hours if possible and in any case, no later than 18h00 UTC Thursday 27 August.

Thank-you,

Jonathan & Lise

--

Dear ICG,

The final CWG proposal, as submitted to the ICG, contained reference to the IANA IPR, primarily within the draft Term Sheet in Annex S. However, given that the Term Sheet was in draft form and that the IPR language was in square brackets, it was subsequently clarified with you that the proposal was effectively silent on the IANA IPR. At the time of drafting the Final Proposal, it was the CWG's intention not to ignore the issue of the IANA IPR, but rather the CWG anticipated that this would be dealt with as part of the detailed work on implementation of the proposal, including the full preparation of a term sheet and the associated contract.

Following from the 31 July 2015 publication for public comment of the ICG proposal, as well as some preliminary legal work commissioned by the CWG and a statement by the ICANN board, it has become apparent that further clarification on the CWG position on the IANA IPR will be helpful. Accordingly, the CWG has discussed and reviewed its position on the IANA IPR, including referring to the ICG proposal and all three responses to the ICG RFP which form the foundation of that proposal.


The CWG is able to formally confirm that its position is consistent with that of the other ICG RFP respondents in that the CWG has no objection to the IANA trademark and the IANA.ORG domain name being transferred to an entity independent of the IANA Numbering Services Operator, in order to ensure that these assets are used in a non-discriminatory manner for the benefit of the entire community. For the avoidance of doubt, we view the CWG position as also consistent with the ICANN board statement of 15 August 2015 on the same subject.

With regard to implementation of the ICG proposal, the CWG expects that, in co-ordination with the other operational communities, the detailed requirements for such an independent entity will be agreed and specified and that the appropriate independent entity will then be created or selected (and adapted if necessary) such that it can meet the detailed requirements.

Thank-you for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,


Jonathan & Lise
For and on behalf of the CWG

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150826/fd9f3999/attachment.html>