<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Draft language
Thanks to all. I have included a few edits. Is everyone OK with this version?
> The GNSO Council wishes to express its disappointment with the Board's
> decision to meet in a closed session on Saturday 23 June to vote on a topic
> which was slated for discussion at the public forum on Thursday, January 28,
> 2012
> :http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2.
>
> ICANN staff had placed the topic of the renewal of the .com Agreement on the
> Thursday public forum agenda some time ago, and this item remains on the
> public forum agenda. We are aware that of a number of GNSO constituencies,
> stakeholder groups and/or Advisory Committees that were looking forward to
> addressing this subject with the board and the ICANN community at the Public
> Forum. However, although the GNSO Council and its constituencies were aware
> of the Board's intent to discuss the contract, we were not aware of its
> intent to approve the contract at its closed session.
>
>
> This comment is not with regard to the merits of the Board’s action, it is
> for the constituencies or stakeholder groups to highlight those as they see
> fit. However, we, the GNSO Council, find the process followed by the Board
> to be objectionable at a time when we are all being urged to advocate for the
> ICANN model in a context of increased global scrutiny. It is therefore
> imperative that the Board hold itself to the highest standards of
> transparency and accountability that it is mandated to uphold.
Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
----------------
Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT
Le 28 juin 2012 à 16:20, <Mary.Wong@xxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
> Thanks to David, Alan, John and Brian - this looks good to me.
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
> Sent from a mobile device; please excuse brevity and any grammatical or
> typographical errors.
>
> "Winterfeldt, Brian" <bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Please see revised draft below with correction suggested by Alan and with
> John’s suggestion which I think is helpful.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Brian J. Winterfeldt
> Partner
> bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Steptoe
>
> From: John Berard [mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 5:40 AM
> To: Winterfeldt, Brian
> Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] Draft language
>
> Brian,
>
> Note my boldface suggestion:
>
> The GNSO Council wishes to express its disappointment with the Board's
> decision to meet in a closed session on Saturday 23 June to vote on a topic
> which was slated for discussion at the public forum on Thursday, January 28,
> 2012
> :http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2.
>
> ICANN staff had placed the topic of the renewal of the .com Agreement on the
> Thursday public forum agenda some time ago, and this item remains on the
> public forum agenda tomorrow. We are aware that of a number of GNSO
> constituencies, stakeholder groups and/or Advisory Committees that were
> looking forward to addressing this subject with the board and the ICANN
> community at the Public Forum. However, although the GNSO Council and its
> constituencies were aware of the Board's intent to discuss the contract, we
> were not aware of its intent to approve the contract at its closed session.
>
>
> This comment is not with regard to the merits of the Board’s action, it is
> for the constituencies or stakeholder groups to highlight those as they see
> fit. However, we, the GNSO Council, find the process followed by the Board
> to be objectionable at a time when we are all being urged to advocate for the
> ICANN model at time of increased global scrutiny, and its is therefore
> imperative that the Board hold itself to the highest standards of
> transparency and accountability that it is mandated to uphold.
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:52 AM, "Winterfeldt, Brian"
> <bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> Jeff
>
> As requested, how about the below draft:
>
> The GNSO Council wishes to express its disappointment with the Board's
> decision to meet in a closed session on Saturday 23 June to vote on a topic
> which was slated for discussion at the public forum on Thursday, January 28,
> 2012 :
> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2.
>
> ICANN staff had placed the topic of the renewal of the .com Agreement on the
> Thursday public forum agenda some time ago, and this item remains on the
> public forum agenda tomorrow. We are aware that of a number of GNSO
> constituencies, stakeholder groups and/or Advisory Committees that were
> looking forward to addressing this subject with the board and the ICANN
> community at the Public Forum. However, neither the GNSO Council nor its
> constituencies, stakeholder groups or liaisons were aware of the Board's
> closed session and adoption of the draft agreement
>
> This comment is not with regard to the merits of the Board’s action, it is
> for the constituencies or stakeholder groups to highlight those as they see
> fit. However, we, the GNSO Council, find the process followed by the Board
> to be objectionable at a time when the private sector is being urged to
> advocate for the ICANN model, and its is therefore imperative that the Board
> hold itself to the highest standards of transparency and accountability that
> it is mandated to uphold.
>
> Hope helpful.
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Brian J. Winterfeldt
> Partner
> bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Steptoe
>
> +1 202 429 6260 direct
> +1 202 903 4422 mobile
> +1 202 429 3902 fax
>
> Steptoe & Johnson LLP
> 1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW
> Washington, DC 20036
> www.steptoe.com<http://www.steptoe.com/>
>
>
>
> This message and any attached documents contain information from the law firm
> Steptoe & Johnson LLP that may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, distribute, or use this
> information. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify
> the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message.
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|