[CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] PTI Bylaws

[Maarten Simon]

Hmm, that is a shame as we may need your input on the Annex C discussion
as you were involved in the drafting of the final texts. Something we need
to come back to later on than.

On 14/07/16 16:04, "cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Paul M
Kane" <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org on behalf of Paul.Kane at icb.co.uk>
wrote:

>Apologies. I may not make the call today, my UK Parliament Commissioner
>role is super hectic at the moment.
>
>Regards too all
>
>Paul
>
>On 14/07/16 11:19, Paul M Kane - CWG wrote:
>> Thanks Jonathan but I have major problems with the new PTI Bylaws text
>> 
>> PTI is a service provider to the ccTLD Registry.  The new text of Annex
>>C is now
>> empowering PTI to interpret local laws for cTLDs and risks destabalising
>> existing registrants of current ccTLD Registries.
>> 
>> The new language proposed for Annex C are not acceptable IMHO they risk
>>the
>> stable operation of ccTLD Registries and their ability to robustly
>>serve their
>> customers.
>> 
>> This is a major change from the CWG proposal
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> Quoting Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>:
>> 
>>> All
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Please see below for Sidley’s communication with the CWG Client
>>>Committee
>>> on the PTI Bylaws.
>>>
>>> Apologies on behalf of the Client Committee that these were not shared
>>>with
>>> the CWG more promptly.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> It seems to me that there are two key issues:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> 1.      We need to understand the landscape of open issues – we will
>>>take
>>> input from Sidley in the CWG meeting today on these
>>>
>>> 2.      We need assistance from Sidley in converting the summary / map
>>>of
>>> those issues into structured public comment on the PTI Bylaws.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Thank-you,
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> From: Flanagan, Sharon [mailto:sflanagan at sidley.com]
>>> Sent: 11 July 2016 05:29
>>> To: Client Committee <cwg-client at icann.org>
>>> Subject: [client com] PTI Bylaws
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Update on PTI Bylaws:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> We have been working with ICANN legal on revisions to the PTI bylaws
>>>based on
>>> the input we have received from CWG.  We had a call with ICANN legal on
>>> Friday afternoon and we circulated a revised draft of the PTI bylaws
>>>to ICANN
>>> legal on Saturday.  On Sunday, ICANN legal circulated a further
>>>revised draft
>>> (marked to show changes from the Sidley draft), which is attached.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> We understand that ICANN legal plans to post the draft PTI bylaws for
>>>comment
>>> early this week notwithstanding the fact that there are open issues in
>>>the
>>> draft based on the CWG input we have received to date.  ICANN legal is
>>> suggesting that CWG can continue to raise its comments through the
>>>public
>>> comment period.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Governance Chart:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> ICANN legal has also circulated a chart of certain governance
>>>provisions
>>> included in the PTI bylaws that are not directly addressed in the CWG
>>> proposal.  We have annotated that chart with a column with our
>>>comments on
>>> those points.  While the details of the PTI bylaws were not specified
>>>in the
>>> CWG proposal, we believe the approach being taken by CWG in the PTI
>>>bylaws on
>>> these governance matters is consistent with the intent of the CWG
>>>proposal.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Annex C:  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> In addition, we previously circulated a chart prepared by ICANN legal
>>>on
>>> their concerns with the incorporation of the Annex C provisions of the
>>>CWG
>>> proposal into the PTI bylaws.  We have reattached that chart for your
>>> reference.  The draft PTI bylaws circulated by ICANN legal do not
>>>include the
>>> Annex C language; instead the draft includes two paragraphs that ICANN
>>>legal
>>> included to address certain principles from Annex C.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Next steps:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Please let us know if you would like to discuss any of these items or
>>>if you
>>> would like us to summarize/map out the open issues.  We can also be
>>>available
>>> to assist in the preparation of a comment letter from CWG assuming
>>>that ICANN
>>> posts this version of the PTI bylaws where open issues remain.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Sharon
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> SHARON R. FLANAGAN
>>>
>>>
>>> SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
>>> 555 California Street
>>> Suite 2000
>>> San Francisco, CA 94104
>>> +1 415 772 1271
>>>  <mailto:sflanagan at sidley.com> sflanagan at sidley.com
>>>  <http://www.sidley.com> www.sidley.com
>>>
>>>   
>>><http://www2.sidley.com/files/upload/signatures/SIDLEY_150-AUTOSIG.png>
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>> 
>>*************************************************************************
>>***************************
>>> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is
>>> privileged or confidential.
>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
>>> attachments and notify us
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>>
>> 
>>*************************************************************************
>>***************************
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>