[Ws2-jurisdiction] The Gap Analysis: Question, Method and Objective -- Proposal for Comment

[matthew shears]

I am also concerned that we look like we are revisiting something that 
was vetted, agreed and signed off by this same community. Perhaps I am 
missing some other rationale or subtlety.


On 27/09/2016 11:12, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>
> This is a good plan going forward.  I have to say, however, that it 
> seems a bit like spinning wheels to me.  We vetted the WS1 plan with 
> two sets of lawyers.  To think that there are gaps that haven’t been 
> identified and that we will discover them is … not terribly 
> realistic.  Still, if the group wants to go through the exercise, by 
> all means …
>
> Paul
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com 
> <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>
>
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>
> www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>
>
> My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ __
>
> *From:*ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org 
> [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *McAuley, David
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2016 10:35 AM
> *To:* ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] The Gap Analysis: Question, Method 
> and Objective -- Proposal for Comment
>
> Thanks Greg,
>
> Because Paragraph 30 of Annex 12 says that “Confirming and assessing 
> the gap analysis ….” will occur in the context of focusing on the 
> settlement of dispute jurisdiction issues I think your approach would 
> be fine if all three numbered items in your note are construed within 
> that Paragraph 30 focus – in other words, that our analysis be only 
> insofar as the questions relate to the settlement of dispute 
> jurisdiction issues.
>
> David
>
> David McAuley
>
> International Policy Manager
>
> Verisign Inc.
>
> 703-948-4154
>
> *From:*ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org> 
> [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2016 1:37 AM
> *To:* ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] The Gap Analysis: Question, Method and 
> Objective -- Proposal for Comment
>
> All,
>
> Based on the call today, I'm presenting the following as the proposed 
> path forward on the Gap Analysis:
>
> 1. _The Question_.  Whether each of the accountability measures 
> proposed in Work Stream 1 can be implemented under ICANN's current 
> jurisdictional framework without any gaps.  (Implementation "without 
> any gaps" means the ability to apply an accountability measure to, and 
> ultimately enforce that measure against, ICANN.)
>
> 2. _The Objective_.  The first objective is to determine whether there 
> are any "gaps," i.e., whether any of the WS1 accountability measures 
> cannot be fully implemented under ICANN's current jurisdictional 
> framework.  After possible gaps are identified, the subgroup will 
> examine each possible gap to determine if it is in fact a gap. A list 
> of identified gaps will be prepared.  (After the gap analysis is 
> completed, the subgroup will then explore possible ways to "close the 
> gap" for each applicable accountability measure, i.e., to implement 
> the measure effectively.)
>
> 3. _The Method_.  The Final Proposal of WS1 will be posted as a Google 
> Doc.  Subgroup members are asked to assign themselves one chapter of 
> the Proposal to review for "gaps."  Notes on potential "gaps" can be 
> made directly on the Google Doc proposal as comments.  A separate 
> sign-up sheet will be posted, also as a Google Doc. Subgroup members 
> that cannot access Google Drive can put their chosen "assignments" 
> into an email, and can also provide their analysis via email as well.  
> Subgroup rapporteurs and staff will make the necessary notations.
>
> Comments are requested and appreciated. However, in order to keep up 
> the momentum, the Final Proposal and sign-up sheet will be posted on 
> Tuesday, September 27.  Our question, objective and method can be 
> further refined even as we move forward.
>
> I look forward to your comments and to seeing the assignments and 
> analyses in the coming days and weeks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction

-- 
--------------
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 771 2472987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20160927/84d82cc9/attachment.html>