Re: [council] Re: Note from CWG-Stewardship Chairs to the Chairs of the CWG-Stewardship Chartering Organizations Regarding IANA Intellectual Property Right

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

Thanks to everyone who weighed in.  Given that there are no objections and 
several expressions of support, I will ask that the GNSO be added to the other 
SO and AC organizations on the letter instructing ICANN to execute the IANA IPR 
agreements.

Thanks again for your assistance on this short-schedule task, and have a great 
weekend.

J.


From: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 20:42
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jonathan Robinson 
<jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [council] Re: Note from CWG-Stewardship Chairs to the Chairs of 
the CWG-Stewardship Chartering Organizations Regarding IANA Intellectual 
Property Right

No objection from the RySG. Full support.

Keith

On Sep 30, 2016, at 2:12 AM, James M. Bladel 
<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Dear Council Colleagues –

As discussed during our call today, please respond by COB tomorrow (and 
preferably sooner) if you have any objections to adding the GNSO to the list of 
SO/ACs instructing ICANN to execute these agreements.

If there are no objections received, we will give Staff the green light to 
proceed.

Thank you,

J.


From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 10:10
To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: FW: Note from CWG-Stewardship Chairs to the Chairs of the 
CWG-Stewardship Chartering Organizations Regarding IANA Intellectual Property 
Right

Dear Councilors–

Please see the note below, in which the leadership of CWG-Stewardship is asking 
all chartering organizations (incl. the GNSO) for their approval to being 
included as signatories on a letter, instructing ICANN to execute the three 
IANA IPR agreements referenced & attached.  They are asking for a response by 
30 SEP (tomorrow).

While acknowledging the last-minute nature of this request, this should be a 
non-controversial issue and I’d like to include a discussion of it under AOB 
for today’s call.

Thanks—

J.




From: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:trang.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 9:37 Subject: Note from CWG-Stewardship 
Chairs to the Chairs of the CWG-Stewardship Chartering Organizations Regarding 
IANA Intellectual Property Right

Dear Chairs,

Please see below a note from the Jonathan Robinson and Lise Fuhr, Co-Chairs of 
the CWG-Stewardship.

--

Dear SO/AC chairs and co-chairs,

As part of the transition implementation work, representatives from the names 
community, the numbers community, the protocol parameters community, the IETF 
Trust, and ICANN have drafted a set of agreements to effectuate the transfer of 
the IANA IPR from ICANN to the IETF Trust and to govern the relationships 
amongst the parties with respect to the IPR after the transfer.

These agreements are:
- IANA IPR Assignment Agreement: This agreement transfers the IPR from ICANN to 
the IETF Trust.
- 3 IANA IPR License Agreements (one each for the names, numbers, and protocol 
parameters IANA services.): These agreements allows for the IANA functions 
operator to use the IPR.
- IANA - IPR Community Agreement: This agreement explains the rights and 
obligations of the IETF Trust and each operational community as regards the IPR.

After a public comment period last month, the agreements have been finalized 
and are ready to be executed.
One of the decisions that the CWG had to make as part of the work was to 
identify who would be the signatory of the Community Agreement on behalf of the 
Naming Community. The decision made by the group, with input from CWG external 
counsel, was to ask ICANN to play that role. An instruction letter has been 
assembled for that purpose.

The Instruction Letter says: "This letter confirms the request of the Cross 
Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on 
Naming Related Functions (“CWG”) for the benefit of those of its listed 
chartering organizations – the Country Code Names Supporting Organization 
(“ccNSO”), the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (“SSAC”), the Generic 
Names Supporting Organization (“GNSO”), the At Large Advisory Committee 
(“ALAC”) and the Governmental Advisory Committee (“GAC”) – that have affirmed 
or hereafter affirm in writing that they agree to be included herein (each a 
“Consenting SO/AC” and collectively, the “Names Community”) that ICANN serve as 
the signatory for the Names Community under the Community Agreement."

This makes reference to the COs affirming in writing that they agree to be 
included in the instruction letter as a consenting SO/AC.
As ICANN might formally reach out to us to obtain confirmation that one or more 
COs have agreed to be a consenting SO/AC, we hereby kindly ask that you provide 
such a written confirmation as a matter of urgency by replying to this email, 
preferably on or before September 30th, 2016, so that the signing of the 
agreement may proceed as planned.

Thank you for your cooperation,
Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson, CWG co-chairs.