[Gnso-bylaws-dt] [Ext] Re: For your review - Staff Report Bylaws & GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revisions & Legal Review

Tue Mar 14 17:25:17 UTC 2017

As promised, here are the IPC responses to the questions in the executive summary of the staff paper.  I regret that I will not be able to participate in the discussion on Wednesday but IPC will be represented there.

Steve Metalitz

[image001]
Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation
T: 202.355.7902 | met at msk.com<mailto:met at msk.com>
Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com<http://www.msk.com/>
1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings at icann.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:17 AM
To: Steve DelBianco; Metalitz, Steven; 'Wolf-Ulrich Knoben'; gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] For your review - Staff Report Bylaws & GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revisions & Legal Review

To facilitate this process and make the document a bit more manageable, I’ve lifted out the table, grouped the questions and legal assessment together and created a separate column for DT input and a DT response. Of course, if there any other elements that need further consideration, apart from the issues identified in the executive summary, please feel free to add these to the table. Those that have not provided their input yet, please feel free to add to the table or send it to the list.

Best regards,

Marika

From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org>>
Date: Monday, March 13, 2017 at 22:06
To: "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com<mailto:met at msk.com>>, 'Wolf-Ulrich Knoben' <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de<mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de>>, "gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>" <gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>>
Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] For your review - Staff Report Bylaws & GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revisions & Legal Review

DT members:   Thanks for looking at this in advance of our Wednesday working session.

In the attached, I pasted the ISPCP points sent by Wolf-Ulrich via eat email below.  And I added BC’s discussion points. (both in red, on pages 2-5.

Glad to have others enter their points in the attached doc, or just send as email text and I will insert.

—Steve

From: gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 5:41 AM
To: gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] For your review - Staff Report Bylaws & GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revisions & Legal Review

Steve and all,

some short answers/comments:

IN 1: yes

IN 5: yes

IN 15: yes, it should be documented. But Board member selection is done on house level, not SG.

IN 37: Is this drafting team the right body to address this (I mean from its composition point of view)? Or shouldn't these procedural items been elaborated by the GNSO RT which took over similar tasks from the SCI? Who's the addressee of a petition in this context? A petition in principle could be filed from anyone within the GNSO community. Criteria should be developed with respect to the specific character of a petition in order to avoid that it just circumvents the GNSO's working process.

IN 44-46: Maybe a kind of "PDP" (Petition Development Process): Raising an issue, preleminary evaluation by (legal?) staff, council decision...

IN 45 (3/4 threshold): I tend to leave this decision with the body which appointed the board member (house). On the other hand each board member is accountable to the entire (SO?) community. This should be taken into consideration as well.
Am 11.03.2017 um 17:07 schrieb Steve DelBianco:
Thanks, Marika.

When we completed our DT report late last year, we did promise to stay engaged and answer questions like these.

So our first step is for each of us to read the draft and think about how to answer the 8 “Questions Identified” in column B, pages 1-4 of our attached doc.

If we can each draft some rough answers to your questions, that would be a great setup for the meeting.

From: <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Date: Monday, March 6, 2017 at 3:13 PM
To: "gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>" <gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] For your review - Staff Report Bylaws & GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revisions & Legal Review

Dear Bylaws Drafting Team,

As you will recall, on 1 December 2016, the GNSO Council directed ‘ICANN Policy Staff to draft proposed language for any necessary modifications or additions to the GNSO Operating Procedures and, if applicable, those parts of the ICANN Bylaws pertaining to the GNSO. The GNSO Council requests that ICANN Legal evaluate whether the proposed modifications are consistent with the post-transition Bylaws and report their findings to the GNSO Council’. In the analysis of the DT recommendations, staff took a minimalist approach by focusing on the minimum changes needed to implement the DT recommendations.

However, in undertaking this work, staff did identify a number of questions and made a number of assumptions that it is requesting the DTs input on before this document and the revised ICANN Bylaws and GNSO Operating Procedures are published for public comment. You will find these questions and assumptions outlined in the attached document (in pdf and word version). To facilitate your review, the main questions have been flagged in the table contained in the executive summary.

We realise that there may be little time for you to review this document ahead of ICANN58 but we hope you are available to join us for the session that has been scheduled on Wednesday 15 March from 17.00 – 18.30 local time (see http://sched.co/9nqV[sched.co]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__sched.co_9nqV&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=ygolKFrVoIkq3BVEkIfyXciZI8RNWsz4SPF-sGh5P-8&s=AzzM0_nincrMVSrNyCyT_v6k7uJxSZOp8xtk_XxR48c&e=> for further details). This session is intended to walk you through our questions and assumptions as well as answer any questions you may have. The DT can also discuss how to proceed following ICANN58 to develop its input on these questions and assumptions which will then allow staff to finalise the documents for publication for public comment.

We look forward to receiving your feedback.

Best regards,

Marika

Marika Konings
Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=ygolKFrVoIkq3BVEkIfyXciZI8RNWsz4SPF-sGh5P-8&s=qiK5zIbZWbHo5IELJuhANX44YEFilMMAH5BUmj1_ZPU&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=ygolKFrVoIkq3BVEkIfyXciZI8RNWsz4SPF-sGh5P-8&s=WvG7bqXWCn7dU3CvO0Ku_RGm3GCgAgZWlay3SnqCIbY&e=>.

_______________________________________________

Gnso-bylaws-dt mailing list

Gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-bylaws-dt at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-bylaws-dt<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-bylaws-dt>

--

Am Steinringer Berg 19

53639 Königswinter

Tel: 02244 873999

Fax: 02244 873955

Mob: 0151 1452 5867
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/attachments/20170314/2523bef2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2772 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/attachments/20170314/2523bef2/image001-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IPC responses to staff paper re DT implementation (8696651).docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 17297 bytes
Desc: IPC responses to staff paper re DT implementation (8696651).docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/attachments/20170314/2523bef2/IPCresponsestostaffpaperreDTimplementation8696651-0001.docx>