RE: [council] Proposed amendment to OSC & PPSC motion

["Mary Wong" <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Jeff - I for one definitely appreciate the insight from you and
did not in any way mean to undermine or downplay the complexity of the
task or the hard work that the PDP team and, indeed, the other teams and
committees, undertook. The reason why these motions and amendments are
being circulated now are, I believe, two-fold; first, for a motion (and
thus its context and content) to be discussed at the upcoming Council
meeting, it has to be submitted 8 days ahead of that meeting. Secondly,
I think that some Councilors (myself included) would like to prevent any
further drawing out of the GNSO Improvements process. 
 
I had tried to craft language that would allow those teams whose work
remains ongoing - particularly the PDP work team - to complete their
work without worrying about re-chartering or other interference. At the
same time, and given that some of the other teams have completed their
tasks, I didn't see a reason to extend the PPSC and OSC charters, and
certainly not without first knowing what else remains to be done from
each committee and team.
 
Your idea to separate the two committees may well be the way to go. For
now, I'm hoping that the motions will spur discussion and, hopefully,
decisive but correct and appropriate steps being taken by the Council in
its managerial role.
 
I hope this clarifies.
 
Thanks and cheers
Mary 

 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH
03301USAEmail: mary.wong@xxxxxxx.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage:
http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on
the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>> 


From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 11/30/2010 10:02 PM
Subject: RE: [council] Proposed amendment to OSC & PPSC motion

All,
I have been watching the e-mails go by and up and am not technically a
member of the Council yet until this weekend when I start as an
alternate for Caroline Greer and then after next week I become a
permanent council member on behalf of the Registries.   I would like to
ask that before the Council considers a motion grouping the PPSC and OSC
together that it takes the time this weekend to learn about what these
groups are doing.  The OSC and PPSC are in very different positions
right now.  As you know, the PPSC is divided into two work teams, the
Working Group Work Team and the PDP Work Team.  The Working Group Work
Team has delivered its final report and hopefully by the time the
Council meets formally next week, the Working Group Work Team will be
ready to deliver that report (as modified by the PPSC) to the Council.

With respect to the PDP Work Team, there is a lot more work to go.  The
entire PDP process, from beginning (“raising an issue”) to end (“Board
approval of a PDP, review of the PDP and the PDP process, etc.) is
incredibly complex.  The PDP Work Team distributed a 150 page initial
report prior to Brussels.  Very few Councilors that I have asked have
read that report.   The PDP Work Team has reviewed extensive public
comment and is addressing both issues that were left over and other new
ones raised.  We have a “draft final report” we are reviewing now, with
the goal of getting that out to the community early in 2011.  I cannot
stress how hard some of the members of the PDP Work Team are working and
how committed they are to completing their task. 
With respect to the PPSC, I do not see a need to for the current
motions being circulated and am a little concerned that the motions are
coming not from the Council Liaisons or even members of the Steering
Committees that are on the Council, but rather are coming from those
that may not have not been that involved in the process at all.  In
fact, with all due respect to the Council Liaisons, the PPSC Council
Liaison has not attended a PPSC meeting in months (if at all).  Come to
think of it, who is the Council Liaison to the PPSC?  
My personal view (and not as Chair of the PPSC or even as a gTLD
Registry rep) is that this motion is too premature.  Lets discuss the
issues raised at this meeting and worry about a motion (if one is
necessary) at the next meeting.  


As the chair of the PPSC, I am happy to answer any questions you all
have.
 

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy




The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for
the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
have received this e-mail message in error and any review,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately and delete the original message.
 

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:44 PM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Proposed amendment to OSC & PPSC motion

 

Hello everyone,

 

In view of the additional information supplied by Julie, Liz and
Philip, but considering also Wendy's and others' points relating to the
workability of the current GNSO processes, I hereby propose the
following amendment to Wendy's motion. Fundamentally, I believe it's
time, and necessary, for the Council now to assume direct responsibility
for reviewing the deliverables from the PPSC and OSC as well as the
respective work teams. In this, the Council should be assisted by the
Standing Committee that was supposed to have been formed some time ago.


 

Of course, this would not preclude either the Council or the Standing
Committee from consulting the teams and committees that drafted and
reviewed the original language and processes; it's just that - with the
amount of projects we are facing and the concerns already expressed over
both the Council's role and the workability of the new GNSO rules and
procedures, the seemingly-endless rounds of discussion, interpretation,
delegation, referral and redrafting has to stop somewhere and that
should be the Council.

 

So, here goes - keeping the original WHEREAS clauses, I suggest the
following RESOLVED clauses to the OSC and PPSC charter motion. I hope
Wendy will consider it friendly.

 

"RESOLVED, the Council acknowledges and thanks the OSC, the PPSC and
the five community work teams for their hard work; and directs each
steering committee and applicable work team chair to identify for the
Council any remaining targets and benchmarks for their respective work
by no later than 19 January 2011, with a view toward final delivery to
the Council of any remaining work items so identified by no later than
the San Francisco meeting.

FURTHER RESOLVED, a Standing Committee to monitor implementation of
GNSO Improvements shall be established no later than 19 January 2011.
The Standing Committee will work with the Council to review and, if
necessary, convene relevant work teams to refine and streamline, the
effectiveness of GNSO Improvements on an ongoing basis."

 

Thanks and cheers

Mary 

 

 

 

Mary W S Wong

Professor of Law

Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH
03301USAEmail: mary.wong@xxxxxxx.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage:
http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on
the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
http://ssrn.com/author=437584
 
 
As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with
the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of
New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have
changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname@xxxxxxxxxxx.
For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law,
please visit law.unh.edu 


As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with
the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of
New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have
changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname@xxxxxxxxxxx.
For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law,
please visit law.unh.edu