Re: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC

["Mary Wong" <MWong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Avri and everyone,
 
My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too late,
I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the
letter.
 
My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in
particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this
list.
 
Cheers
Mary
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php 
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network
(SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 


>>> Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>>

sure thing.

I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still worth  
sending.  Those of you who haven't abstained, please let the list know 

if this assumption is in error in the next few hours.

thanks

a.

Dear Janis,

Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in  
response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO.  This 

communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted   
abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency,  Internet  
Service Providers and Connectivity Providers
Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette.  Additionally Mary Wong, as an 

active participant in the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT),  
felt that support of this document at this time might be inconsistent 

with her work as part of the IRT and has also abstained.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our comment 

at this time.  The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the issue 

with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.

Best Regards,
On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes wrote:

>
> Avri
>
> Although this is a letter from the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO 

> there's
> been considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency 

> and as
> a result we're unable to offer support for the letter.
>
> In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP members have  
> expressed
> there is also an overriding view that the GNSO Council doesn't have 

> to offer
> a response on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should 

> be left
> to the Board.
>
> Could I ask that the note you propose below is subject to a minor  
> amendment
> that adds the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers
> Constituency to the abstention.
>
> Regards
>
> Tony
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> ] On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter to GAC
>
>
> I propose sending the the following to the GAC later today.  I would
> especially be interested in receiving confirmation from the BC,
> Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the statement I have included
on
> your abstentions.
>
> ---
>
> Dear Janis,
>
> Attached please find a letter from the GNSO Council written in
> response to your opem letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. 
This
> communication has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted
> abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency. Additionally
> both Kristina Rosette and Mary Wong, as active participants in the
> Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), felt that support of this
> document at this time might be inconsistent with their work as part
of
> the IRT and have also abstained.
>
> Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting our
comment
> at this time.  The GNSO Council looks forward to discussing the
issue
> with the GAC at our joint meeting in Sydney.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
>
> The attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the
> letter with changes accepted and date updated.
>
> thanks
>
> a.
>
>
>
>
>