Re: AW: [council] Adrian's gameplan

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxx>]

This version is fine, thanks Mary

Bill

On Jun 18, 2011, at 5:25 PM, <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> I don't have a problem with that, Wolf-Ulrich i.e. your insertion and 
> deleting the reference to "on behalf of our Cs and SGs".
>  
> If I may, we can also consider deleting the last part of my draft, which 
> means the statement will now read (with Wolf-Ulrich's suggested changes 
> included):
>  
> "The GNSO Council wishes to reiterate its support for the work of the Joint 
> Applicant Support Working Group (JAS WG). We unanimously 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, inter alia from developing regions of the 
> world, 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."
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 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: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To:   <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC:   <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 6/18/2011 5:20 AM
> Subject:      AW: [council] Adrian's gameplan
> 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
> 
> 
>