ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] NomCom appointee skill sets


If we were to use this language for additions to the Baseline criteria. I agree 
with James that would be appropriate. 

David

On 3 Nov 2014, at 9:07 am, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Colleagues:
> 
> Apologies for jumping in to this thread so late.  But it occurs to me that by 
> using the word "law" we are significantly (and, IMO, inappropriately) 
> limiting the potential pool of NomCom appointees to lawyers.
> 
> Recommend that we replace each instance of "law" with broader terms, like 
> "issues" or "concepts" or "topics."
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> J.
> ____________
> James Bladel
> GoDaddy
> 
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 9:15 AM, David Cake <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 3 Nov 2014, at 7:00 am, Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>  
>>> I read Brian’s suggested addition of IP law to the skillset as motivated by 
>>> the specification of certain relevant areas of the law but not others. If 
>>> we articulate the skill set at a higher level of abstraction (knowledge of 
>>> and experience in relation to law relevant to the DNS), would that satisfy 
>>> all concerns?
>> 
>> Not really. We would still be specifying a set of legal skills that we think 
>> would likely be useful to council deliberation, rather than a set of legal 
>> skills that we think would likely be useful to council deliberations AND 
>> that the council is unlikely to already have. 
>> To reiterate - my issue with having intellectual property law on the list 
>> isn't because I think intellectual property law isn't important (it clearly 
>> is), my issue is that any given council almost certainly has at least two 
>> experts in IP law, and I've don't think in the time I've been in iCANN there 
>> have been less than three on council. 
>> The more specific we are in our instructions to NomCom, the likely we are 
>> that NomCom will give us some of what we ask for.
>> And NomCom does seem to pay attention to the list, though clearly reliant on 
>> who applies (for example, the prior list included both intergovernmental 
>> expertise and economics, and we got Carlos, an economist who has been in the 
>> GAC. Thanks, NomCom!). 
>> 
>> I'd have no particular objection to adding Brian's 'general comprehension of 
>> IP law' to the baseline criteria expected of all councillors - I presume all 
>> of us could explain what a trademark, copyright, and patent are if pressed, 
>> and most of us have significantly more knowledge than that - though it 
>> doesn't seem as important to me  as the other baseline criteria, such as 
>> basic knowledge of DNS systems and industry structure. But the variable 
>> criteria are to 'fill gaps in the skill set of the Council' (quoting 
>> directly), and I don't think intellectual property law is a notable gap.
>> Regards
>> David
>>>  
>>> Best wishes,
>>>  
>>> Heather
>>>  
>>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
>>> Behalf Of Edward Morris
>>> Sent: Saturday, 1 November 2014 6:02 PM
>>> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets
>>>  
>>> Hello Susan.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> - At the end of the day consumer protection, insuring that the domain name 
>>> system is safe and secure, should be one of our highest priorities.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> I agree with you that consumer protection is a justifiable and proper 
>>> rationale for the creation and extension of intellectual monopoly rights 
>>> and has been deemed so in Anglo-American jurisprudence, at least, since the 
>>> Bakers Marking Law of 1266. We may on occasion disagree with the structure 
>>> and scope of such rights but I'm delighted there seems to be some practical 
>>> agreement on the purpose of the rights themselves.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> -We could restructure the list 
>>>  
>>> International law which includes the following: 
>>>      Data protection
>>>      Privacy
>>>      Consumer rights
>>>      Human rights
>>>      Competition law
>>>      Intellectual property law
>>>  
>>>  
>>> I think this is a fine and practical proposal that I support.
>>>  
>>> Thanks so much for your contribution.
>>>  
>>> Regards,
>>>  
>>> Ed
>> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>