Re: [council] FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the Process

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brian, Jonathan & Councilors:

This aligns fairly closely with the RrSG position that each SO/AC should submit 
the number of delegates required to be representative, but be encouraged to 
keep the number as small as possible.

Thanks-

J.

From: <Winterfeldt>, "Brian J." 
<brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Friday, May 23, 2014 at 12:56
To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [council] FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed 
Next Steps for the Process

Dear Jonathan:

As an initial reaction, I am tentative to agree with the four SG representative 
model for this WG.

In parallel, with respect to the IANA transition steering committee, I would 
refer you to the formal IPC comments on the matter below.  The comments 
essentially conclude that each of the seven constituent organizations within 
the GNSO should be represented on the steering committee.


·         ISSUE:The composition of theSteering Committeeis troublesome.

o    Fromthe GNSOpoint ofview, havingonly two memberson the Steering 
Committeeis inconsistent with the multistakeholder compositionof the GNSO. The 
GNSOis an “umbrella” forseven distinctorganizations,representing different 
categoriesof stakeholders,with widelydiffering and often opposed points of 
view.It isnot acceptable that at least five,if not six, of the GNSO 
constituentorganizations, and atleast two, and possiblythree, of theGNSO 
Stakeholder Groupswill not berepresented onthe SteeringCommittee. Who willnot 
be representedand why?


o    On theother hand, theASO (as an ICANNSO) and the NRO(as an “affected 
party”) each get2 representatives.However, theASO and the NROare essentially 
thesame organization pursuant to their2004 Memorandum of Understanding.(This 
MoUestablishes that theNRO fulfills therole, responsibilities, and functionsof 
the ASO as definedwithin theICANN Bylaws. 
Seehttp://www.nro.net/documents/icann-address-supporting-organization-aso-mou,Art.
 1.)


o    Viewedfrom outsideICANN, thisis an even moretroublesome proposal.  For 
example,if one orboth of the GNSOrepresentatives is fromeither theRegistry or 
RegistrarSG, therewould beno representativeof the “private sector”(i.e., CSG) 
or no representativeof “civilsociety” (i.e.,NCSG), orboth. Atthe same time,it 
is possible thatthe Registriescould haverepresentatives comingthrough IETF or 
IABchannels, givingthem additionalrepresentation.


·         PROPOSAL:The Steering Groupshould bereconstituted so thateach of 
theseven constituentorganizations of theGNSO has a SteeringCommittee seat, 
whilethe NRO/ASO (combined) entityhas two seats.

Thank you,

Brian

Brian J. Winterfeldt
Head of Internet Practice
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118
p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244
brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> / 
www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/>


From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: May 23, 2014 at 9:43:18 AM EDT
To: John Berard <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>, 
Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [council] FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed 
Next Steps for the Process
Agree with Volker, John & Jonathan, and believe this approach should be adopted 
by other community groups (e.g. The proposed IANA Steering Group).

Thanks—

J.


From: John Berard <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Friday, May 23, 2014 at 8:38
To: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [council] FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed 
Next Steps for the Process


Jonathan,

I would support any recommendation that properly weights the voice of the GNSO 
community.

Berard
On May 23, 2014 4:29 AM, Jonathan Robinson 
<jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
All,

It is my view that the GNSO should reasonably expect to have four 
representatives (one per SG) on this Working Group.

Please let me know if you think similarly or differently.

Jonathan

From: David Olive [mailto:david.olive@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 16 May 2014 08:46
To: Jonathan Robinson; Byron Holland; Louie Lee; 
heather.dryden@xxxxxxxx<mailto:heather.dryden@xxxxxxxx>; Olivier MJ 
Crepin-Leblond; Patrik Fältström; Lars-Johan Liman; Jun Murai
Cc: Theresa Swinehart; Samantha Eisner
Subject: FW: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for 
the Process

Dear SO-AC Chairs:

In follow up to ICANN’s recent announcement on the Enhancing ICANN 
Accountability review, part of the success of this group will be through the SO 
and AC’s identification of members to serve on the Working Group.  In contrast 
to the ATRT reviews and others, ICANN will not be making community appointments 
to the group from a slate of identified candidates; the community 
representation on this Working Group is to be determined by the SO/AC 
leadership.  We are hoping that you can start consideration of membership from 
SO or AC that you are leading. As ICANN is trying to align the timeline of the 
Enhancing ICANN Accountability work to the IANA Stewardship Transition work, we 
are hoping that we can have community representation identified in advance of 
ICANN50 in London.

To help structure the work of the Working Group, ICANN has identified a range 
of subject matter areas within which competency would be helpful, including:
·         Internet Technical Operations
·         International Organizational Reviews
·         Global Accountability Tools and Metrics
·         Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanism
·         Internet Consumer Protection
·         Economics (Marketplace and Competition)
·         Global Ethics Frameworks
·         Operational, Finance and Process
·         Board Governance
·         Transparency
·         Risk Management
While we did not specify the full number of community members that will be 
appointed to the Working Group, we are hopeful that each SO and AC will 
consider identifying two representatives (and no more than three) so that the 
Working Group is of a size that can perform its work in an efficient manner.  
We also encourage the consideration of the subject matters when identifying 
representatives.

If you have more questions about this process, please let Theresa Swinehart or 
myself  know.

Best regards,        David

David A. Olive
Vice President, Policy Development Support
General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727
Mobile:       + 1. 202.341.3611
Email:  david.olive@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:david.olive@xxxxxxxxx>
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>








From: David Olive <david.olive@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:david.olive@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 12:47 AM
To: "soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:soac-infoalert@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Theresa Swinehart 
<theresa.swinehart@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:theresa.swinehart@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Enhancing ICANN Accountability | ICANN - Proposed Next Steps for the 
Process

http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/enhancing-accountability

Proposed Next Steps for the Process
Establishing the ICANN Accountability Working Group:

At the ICANN meeting in Singapore, members of the community suggested 
establishing a working group to address topics raised around ICANN 
Accountability. To respond to both the community dialogues and suggestions, an 
ICANN Accountability Working Group is proposed.

The leaders of ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees will be 
responsible for appointment of community members to the Working Group. 
Community members with skills in the subject matter areas listed below are 
encouraged to have their names put forward by the leadership of ICANN's 
Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees for participation in the 
Working Group before the end of the comment and reply period. The Board may 
appoint liaisons to the Working Group. ICANN staff will identify external 
experts in these subject matter areas to join the Working Group and bring in 
new ideas. The subject matter areas are:

  *   Internet Technical Operations
  *   International Organizational Reviews
  *   Global Accountability Tools and Metrics
  *   Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanism
  *   Internet Consumer Protection
  *   Economics (Marketplace and Competition)
  *   Global Ethics Frameworks
  *   Operational, Finance and Process
  *   Board Governance
  *   Transparency
  *   Risk Management

After the public comment and reply period, the Working Group will commence in 
time for the ICANN 50 Meeting. It's expected that sub-working groups on 
specialized subject areas will be useful and open to all including experts.

The ICANN Accountability Working Group would coordinate community dialogue, 
including discussion on draft materials on the discussions and proposed themes 
outlined above with regards to strengthening ICANN's accountability to address 
the absence of its historical contractual relationship to the U.S. Government 
and other identified issues. One of the first tasks of the Working Group will 
be to identify the issues that need to be solved. The ICANN Accountability 
Working Group would prepare a draft report on issues identified including 
whether measures are needed to strengthen ICANN's accountability, and if so, 
the recommended time frames for development of new or improved mechanisms, if 
any. The draft report would be provided for public comment. The ICANN 
Accountability Working Group would submit its final report to the ICANN Board. 
The Board would immediately and publicly post the final report, consider 
whether to adopt all or parts of it, and direct the CEO to implement those 
parts it has accepted once that decision is made.

It is expected that the ICANN Accountability Working Group would operate in an 
open, transparent and inclusive process, primarily through remote participation 
opportunities, that would include:

  *   A website that would include a timeline of activities and events, as well 
as all materials and communications from the working group, and a full archive 
of all content provided and evaluated throughout the process;
  *   A mailing list to ensure anyone can remain involved in the activities and 
progress of the group; and,
  *   All meetings and phone conference would be open for stakeholders to 
observe and transcripts and recordings would be posted.

Questions for Community Discussion:

As the next steps are being outlined and process finalized, ICANN is collecting 
community input to help provide feedback to further the work of the ICANN 
Accountability Working Group once it is comprised. ICANN is now seeking 
community discussion on both the questions first posed in March 2014 as well as 
some additional questions:

  *   What issues does the community identify as being core to strengthening 
ICANN's overall accountability in the absence of its historical contractual 
relationship to the U.S. Government?
  *   What should be the guiding principles to ensure that the notion of 
accountability is understood and accepted globally? What are the consequences 
if the ICANN Board is not being accountable to the community? Is there anything 
that should be added to the Working Group's mandate?
  *   Do the Affirmation of Commitments and the values expressed therein need 
to evolve to support global acceptance of ICANN's accountability and so, how?
  *   What are the means by which the Community is assured that ICANN is 
meeting its accountability commitments?
  *   Are there other mechanisms that would better ensure that ICANN lives up 
to its commitments?
  *   What additional comments would you like to share that could be of use to 
the ICANN Accountability Working Group?

Please provide your input on the questions above at 
comments-enhancing-accountability-06may14@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:comments-enhancing-accountability-06may14@xxxxxxxxx>

Download a PDF of this document 
here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability/enhancing-accountability-06may14-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 375 KB].


David A. Olive
Vice President, Policy Development Support
General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters –Istanbul
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Direct Line: +90.212.381.8727
Mobile:       + 1. 202.341.3611
Email:  david.olive@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:david.olive@xxxxxxxxx>
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>








===========================================================
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the 
Internal Revenue
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used 
and cannot be used
by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on 
the taxpayer.
===========================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information 
intended for the exclusive
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain 
information that is
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under 
applicable law.  If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, 
copying, disclosure or
distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or 
sanction.  Please notify
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and 
delete the original
message without making any copies.
===========================================================
NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability 
partnership that has
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
===========================================================