Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report

[<Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I know questions have been raised regarding the actual Report, and the
process by which ALAC transmitted the Report to the Board. I had
thought, however, that it is very clear that Rafik and Carlton
definitely followed the terms of the GNSO charter in directly sending
the Report to us, at the same time that they sent it to ALAC (i.e. it
was not them as Co-Chairs or the JAS WG that went directly to the
Board).
 
As such, why shouldn't we say so in the note?
 
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 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: Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
To:"Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC:"'tim@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 5/17/2011 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant
Support Second Milestone Report
So that's one vote for version B, right?


Stéphane




Le 17 mai 2011 à 17:54, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :



Unfortunately, I cannot commit on behalf of the rysg to that last
sentence on "observance" and would prefer its deletion since on our last
rysg call questions were raised and I am not sure it adds to the
substance of the note.

Thanks. 
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Vice President, Law & Policy 
NeuStar, Inc. 
Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx 


 
From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:43 AM
To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
Cc: 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 Report 
 
Thanks Tim, Jeff, Mary and Alan,

This would be the proposed message then. Either (I call this version
A):

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 GNSO-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
GNSO Council Chair

Or (this my version B):

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. 
 
I would be grateful if you could convey the GNSO Council's message to
the Board.
 
Best regards,
Stephane van Gelder
GNSO Council Chair


As Olga had requested a vote, I would like to suggest that we give
ourselves until Thursday's meeting to vote by return email to the list
on either version A or B, and whichever has the most votes is the one I
send.


Is that acceptable to everyone?


Thanks,


Stéphane



Le 17 mai 2011 à 14:12, tim@xxxxxxxxxxx a écrit :



No 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.


Tim
From: 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 Report

Councillors,

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.

Stéphane




Le 14 mai 2011 à 16:31, <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 IP
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: Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
To:Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>, Council GNSO
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 5/14/2011 5:18 AM
Subject: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant
Support Second Milestone Report
Thanks 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 Report

Date :Fri, 13 May 2011 20:26:34 -0700
De :ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (
mailto:staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx )
Pour :Secretary <secretary@xxxxxxxxx> ( mailto:secretary@xxxxxxxxx )
Copie à :ocl@xxxxxxx <ocl@xxxxxxx> ( mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx ),
carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx <carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx> (
mailto:carlton.samuels@xxxxxxxxx ), rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx
<rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx> ( mailto:rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx ), ICANN
At-Large Staff<staff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ( mailto: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 “Status of this Document”); 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 Vernon
ICANN At-Large Staff

email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org
website: 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>