AW: [council] Adrian's gameplan

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

1. See my insertion. I think "needy applicants" is to be seen in a wider range 
- as referenced in the JAS report, too.
 
2. The term "and on behalf of all our Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups" 
means (time-eating) co-ordination
 

Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich 

 


________________________________

        Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Im Auftrag von Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Gesendet: Samstag, 18. Juni 2011 10:58
        An: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
        Betreff: RE: [council] Adrian's gameplan
        
        
        How about -
         
        "The GNSO Council wishes to reiterate its support for the work of the 
Joint Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG). We unanimously, and on behalf 
of all our Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups, believe that it is important 
for the new gTLD program to be globally inclusive, and to have as part of the 
implementation plan meaningful and workable mechanisms which will assist 
potential needy applicants [WUK: ]  - inter alia from developing regions of the 
world[WUK: ]  -  participate in the first round of the new gTLD program as 
fully as possible. We reiterate also our thanks to the members of the JAS WG 
for all their hard work in preparing the two Milestone Reports, and look 
forward to receiving its Final Report so that recommendations for ensuring 
equal access to the new gTLD program can be discussed and implemented."  
         
        I would suggest that, if we can, a statement such as this (tweaked as 
necessary) be issued to the community (including the Board and the GAC) as soon 
as possible :)
         
        Cheers
        Mary
        
        
         
        Mary W S Wong
        Professor of Law
        Chair, Graduate IP Programs
        Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
        UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
        Two White Street
        Concord, NH 03301
        USA
        Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Phone: 1-603-513-5143
        Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
        Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network 
(SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
        >>> 
From:   Rosemary Sinclair <rosemary.sinclair@xxxxxxxxxxx>       
To:      Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "tim@xxxxxxxxxxx" 
<tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>, 
"owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
"Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx" <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>    
CC:      "'GNSO Council List'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Date:   6/18/2011 4:48 AM       
Subject:        RE: [council] Adrian's gameplan 
Or that using a CWG when we do not have clear, agreed processes made progress 
on an issue where there was common commitment to doing "something" much more 
difficult for the WG members and the Council

Given that we now have a unanimous position supporting the group's work I think 
Mary's original proposal was very useful as it took the content out of play and 
left our ongoing discussion to focus on process management issues....in this 
case implementation proposals rather than policy proposals....

I'd support Mary's original version

Cheers

Rosemary
________________________________________
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Adrian Kinderis [adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 5:48 PM
To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx; Stéphane Van Gelder; owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
Subject: RE: [council] Adrian's gameplan

+1

Adrian Kinderis


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of tim@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, 18 June 2011 3:48 PM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder; owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'
Subject: Re: [council] Adrian's gameplan

And that a cwg or jwg may not have been the appropriate mechanism for the issue.

Tim
________________________________
From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 09:09:47 +0200
To: <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'GNSO Council List'<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] Adrian's gameplan

Thanks Mary,

Would you be up for drafting a proposed statement, for the Council's 
consideration?

Stéphane



Le 18 juin 2011 à 09:01, <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>> 
a écrit :


In partial follow-up to Adrian's point about possible deliverables and courses 
of action, I'd offer the suggestion I made during today's discussion, viz., 
that the GNSO Council consider circulating a brief statement to the ICANN 
community, stating its support for the work being done by the JAS WG and 
reiterating the importance of the issues they are considering.




Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: 
http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>>>
From:

"Andrei Kolesnikov" <andrei@xxxxxxxx<mailto:andrei@xxxxxxxx>>

To:

"'Adrian Kinderis'" 
<adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, "'GNSO Council 
List'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>

Date:

6/18/2011 1:13 AM

Subject:

RE: [council] Adrian's gameplan

I think adding "set and bind to the timelines" would be beneficial.  Or there 
will be always a workaround for "endless discussion".

--andrei

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 12:56 PM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Adrian's gameplan

As I discussed in the Working Session today.

The four issues based on this discussion (as I see them);

-          Stephane speaking directly to the Board
-          Katim's email and the issues of the JAS WG
o   Processes within the Council
-          The future of Cross Community Working Groups
o   Publishing of reports etc
-          The optics of the GNSO Council and the promotion of its internal 
processes and representation
o   Multi stakeholder make up
o   Differing views/ differing

It would be best, I think, to try and get some deliverables and courses of 
action in order to promote resolution.

Adrian Kinderis