[CWG-Stewardship] Proposed Footnote to inclusion of ICANN as potential signatory on behalf of Names Community

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear All

The  idea that ICANN SIGN ON BEHALF OF Names Community was legally wrong

There must be

   1.

   Names community establish an unincorporated associated
   2.

   That association could sign on behalf names community or
   3.

   That association e could delegate its authority to a third legal entity
   to sign on its behalf

You over simplifying the matter and propose CUT & PASTE approach

If CWG on its legal existence as established by its charter decides to
request ICANN to sign the Co-Chairs need to write a request the draft of
which must be approved by CWG first in a call and second on mailing list
then sending that request to ICANN and ICANN formally reply to that in
writing.

That is the process

NO CUT & PASTE

However, the formulation that I proposed is a mid way between the two and
has legal validity

Regards

Kavouss

2016-08-12 8:07 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>:

> What is wrong with my formulation
> Yes CWG Client did that but CWG did not
> kavouss
>
>
> 2016-08-12 7:49 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
>
>> We made the request Kavous, I was even the one that raised the question
>> and the request was sent to ICANN legal by the cwg client.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Sent from my LG G4
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>> On 11 Aug 2016 10:49 p.m., "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Seun
>>> YOU MISSED MY Argument
>>> It is said At the request of CWG....
>>> We have not MADE SUCH REQUEST BY cwg.
>>> It was fabricated as such
>>> I disagree with that
>>> No formal request made to ICANN and no reply received from the Board
>>> There was no Board's Member at the meeting and staff does not have such
>>> right to put in Our mouth a text .
>>> I disagree
>>> However, I proposed the following formulation .
>>> At the request  MADE AT CWG CALL ,,,.,,, ICANN .....
>>> It means that the request is limited as being made at that call only
>>> That does not change the substance but reflects the reality
>>> Kavouss
>>>
>>> 2016-08-11 23:35 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> "...*ICANN** has indicated that it could serve as the counterparty to
>>>> the Community Agreement on behalf of the Names Community*..."
>>>>
>>>> I did not stay all through the meeting so may have missed that part
>>>> where ICANN confirmed this, It's good to know.  FWIW, I believe Greg's text
>>>> accurately captures the current status.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> On 11 Aug 2016 17:16, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> All,
>>>>>
>>>>> As discussed, the following is the proposed footnote to accompany the
>>>>> inclusion of ICANN (in square brackets to indicate the non-final nature of
>>>>> that proposal) as the potential signatory to the Community Agreement on
>>>>> behalf of the Names Community.
>>>>>
>>>>> This will need to be finalized in the next 1-2 hours so that the
>>>>> documents can be put out for public comment today.  No objections were
>>>>> heard on today's call.  Any violent objections or genius revisions should
>>>>> be sent in reply to this email.
>>>>>
>>>>> *CWG-Stewardship is considering the appropriate entity to be the
>>>>> signatory to the Community Agreement on behalf of the Names Community.  At
>>>>> the request of the CWG-Stewardship, ICANN has indicated that it could serve
>>>>> as the counterparty to the Community Agreement on behalf of the Names
>>>>> Community and ICANN has been included in this draft.  ICANN (or another
>>>>> counterparty) would be subject to process and criteria as determined by
>>>>> CWG-Stewardship.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Greg
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>>> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160812/4ae4928f/attachment-0001.html>