Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
I will try to address Jeff's questions, but will in parallel pass my answers by the ALAC to ensure that I am not putting words into their collective mouths. First, I read Mary's "the chartering process" to mean "the process laid out in their charter(s)". On why At-Large staff forwarded the report to the Board, this was done at the request of the ALAC through its Chair and Executive Committee and was not an independent action of staff.. Regarding the appropriateness of one of the chartering organizations sending the report to the Board, the GNSO charter had the following sentence which the ALAC copied verbatim: "4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by the respective SO/AC." There is nothing there that I construe to meaning that the chartering organizations must work in tandem. Alan At 17/05/2011 09:02 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote: I also would like to see the statement about the "scrupulous observance of the chartering process" removed. We still need to find out why the at-large icann staff sent the report to the board on May 9th as is indicated in Olivier's note. I am also not convinced that one organization sending the report to the board without the approval of the other organization is in line with the chartering process, but we can discuss that further.Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. Vice President, Law & Policy NeuStar, Inc. Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx From: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 08:12 AMTo: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>; owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone ReportNo objection if you remove the last sentence. There is no chartering process for CWGs. The ALAC and GNSO could not even agree on what the charter should be. And at least a few of us have concerns about how and why CWGs are being formed.TimFrom: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx> Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200 To: Council GNSO<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone ReportCouncillors,Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a message which I could send to the Chairman of the Board in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO.Thanks Mary for providing this draft. Please let me have your comments. StéphaneLe 14 mai 2011 à 16:31, <<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> <<mailto:Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to you on the Council letter; there has been some lively discussion among some NCSG folks about it.We suggest the following draft: Dear Peter,We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second Milestone Report. As the other chartering organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council notes that it has not yet approved the Report. We acknowledge the Board's desire to move forward with new gTLDs, including issues relating to applicant support, and hope to provide the Board with our advice and recommendations as soon as possible. The GNSO Council would also like to inform the Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's scrupulous observance of the chartering process, in submitting its Report simultaneously to ALAC and the GNSO for review.I would be grateful if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to the Board.Best regards, Stephane van Gelder Cheers Mary Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Chair, Graduate IP Programs Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IPUNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: <mailto:mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>mary.wong@xxxxxxxxxxx Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: <http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: <http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>> From: Stéphane Van Gelder<<mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx> To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <<mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx>ocl@xxxxxxx>, Council GNSO <<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Date: 5/14/2011 5:18 AMSubject: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone ReportThanks Olivier. GNSO Council, FYI. A good weekend to all. Stéphane Le 14 mai 2011 à 11:03, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond a écrit :Dear Stéphane,please find enclosed, a copy of our follow-up message to the Board including ALAC comments. Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any query about its contents.Have a good week-end! Kind regards, Olivier -------- Message original --------Sujet: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone ReportDate : Fri, 13 May 2011 20:26:34 -0700De : ICANN At-Large Staff <mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Pour : Secretary <mailto:secretary@xxxxxxxxx><secretary@xxxxxxxxx>Copie à : <mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx>ocl@xxxxxxx <mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx><ocl@xxxxxxx>, <mailto:carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx>carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx><carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx>, <mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx><rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>, ICANN At-Large Staff<mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Dear all,The At-Large staff has the honor of transmitting to you, on behalf of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC): * The Second Milestone Report of the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group ( JAS WG), with a revised ALAC introduction (entitled â??Status of this Documentâ??); and * The Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report. We request that these documents (attached here) be forwarded to the members of the ICANN Board. The Second Milestone Report was received by the ALAC and the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) on 7 May 2011. Then, the At-Large staff, on behalf of the ALAC, initially forwarded this Report to the Board on 9 May 2011. Please note that the Report itself has not been substantively changed since the Board initially received it on 9 May. During the period 7?13 May, comments on the Report were collected from the At-Large Community. These comments are the basis for the Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report attached here. The ALAC ratification process for the Second Milestone Report and the ALAC Statement will begin on 14 May, and the results will be forwarded to the Board.Please note that GNSO approval of this document is being conducted independently and has not reached the approval stage.Regards,Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn VernonICANN At-Large Staff email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org website: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/>www.atlarge.icann.org<jas-milestone2-report-7may11-en-alac-revision.pdf><AL-ALAC-ST-0511-2 ALAC Statement on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report - EN.pdf>
|