[CWG-Stewardship] Letter of instruction from the CWG to ICANN regarding the IANA IPR Community Agreement.

[James Gannon]

Its rather worrying to me that your raising points that the CWG has discussed at length over the last well year and also seemingly a lack of understanding of the timelines involved here.

-James

From: <cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Christopher Wilkinson <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>>
Date: Saturday 24 September 2016 at 23:03
To: GREG SHATAN <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info>>, Lise Fuhr <Fuhr at etno.eu<mailto:Fuhr at etno.eu>>
Cc: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org> IANA" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org<mailto:cwg-stewardship at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Letter of instruction from the CWG to ICANN regarding the IANA IPR Community Agreement.

Dear Greg:

Thankyou. I trust that I am by now more enlightened.

1. That I may have misread matters is a minor concern that I shall endeavour to correct in the next few days. What is of greater import is that, as I rather suspect, a wide range of interested parties ('stakeholders') may not have read all these documents atall. I propose that each and all of the CWG proposed contracts and agreements should be posted for public comment in translation to the ICANN working languages.

2. I understand that the CCG has been 'created' to regulate the relationships between the Naming Community and the IETF Trust, thus the interest in IPR.
  To which we have volunteered to contribute time and - I trust - understanding. However,

3. The leap from the IETF Trust to directing ICANN - as indicated in the draft Letter of Instruction - has not been explained. As far as I can see, the small number of delegates to the CCG (Representatives and Co-Chairs, including apparently ourselves) have no mandate to direct ICANN about anything. What is the eventual scope of these instructions?

4. I would agree to your suggestion that some tutorials might be in order. If so, these should take place well before anything is finalised, and after public consultation (see 1. above)
  Thus it is perhaps premature to demand that ICANN accept the draft Letter of Instructions.

Regards

CW



On 24 Sep 2016, at 21:22, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:

Chris,

You're misreading the agreement and the letter.

The language you quote regarding "guidance, advice, and if expressly specified in this Agreement, approvals" is from the Community Agreement and refers to the relationship between the Community Coordination Group and the IETF Trust.  This should be readily apparent when looking at the entire Section 2.1, from which you pulled that quote:

"The CCG is hereby formed, and shall operate in accordance with the terms set forth below, to provide guidance, advice, and if expressly specified in this Agreement, approvals, to the IETF Trust regarding the stewardship of the IANA Intellectual Property."

The language you quote regarding "Instructs" and "directs" is from the Letter of Instruction and refers to the relationship between the Names Community and ICANN acting as a signatory on behalf of the Names Community.  This can be seen in Section 3 of the Letter of Instruction ("ICANN will follow the instructions of the Names Community") as well as in Section 7 ("ICANN will act solely at the direction of the Names Community").

Each is appropriate for their respective circumstances.

Please let me know if I can be of further assistance in understanding the agreements.  It strikes me that, once the CCG representatives have all been selected, a webinar or other presentation on the agreements might be in order.  This will help those who were relatively less involved in the process understand the agreements and the relationships among the parties.

Best regards,

Greg

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Christopher Wilkinson <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>> wrote:
Umm … then how did we get from:

<<…guidance, advice, and if expressly specified in this Agreement, approvals…>>

to " instructs" and "directs" - ?

CW

On 24 Sep 2016, at 11:22, Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at nlnetlabs.nl<mailto:jaap at nlnetlabs.nl>> wrote:

> Morning Steve,
>
>> On Sep 23, 2016, at 22:23, Steve Crocker <steve.crocker at board.icann.org<mailto:steve.crocker at board.icann.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for this.  What does CCG stand for?  Apologies if it’s there and I missed it.  My eyes glazed over with the plethora of acronyms.
>
> I'm nog sure whether anybody bothered to answer this, but since I'm
> too loosing track of the acronyms and especially this one as well (it is
> used for different groups I counted at least three), I looked up a
> reference (again).  In this case it is the Community Community Group
> created in the "IANA IPR Community Agreement" [1] to "to provide
> guidance, advice, and if expressly specified in this Agreement,
> approvals, to the IETF Trust regarding the stewardship of the IANA
> Intellectual Property".
>
>       jaap
>
>
> [1]
> <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/Community-Agreement%20-%2008-05-2016%20marked%20against%2007-30-2016.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1473771319000&api=v2>
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto:CWG-Stewardship at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org<mailto: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/20160924/0bed5bcf/attachment.html>