From dave  Fri Feb  1 18:15:18 2013
From: dave (David Cake)
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 08:15:18 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [NCSG-Discuss] On Diversity and Discrimination
In-Reply-To: <510B2494.1080604@churchofreality.org>
References: <201302010004.r1104vv3032443@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<C693E24D-6C65-4A5D-8327-E88E4D481CFE@acm.org>
	<dc57a5feaf2405d82bd53393220464e8.squirrel@webmail.musicunbound.com>
	<201302010151.r111pj6t000568@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<510B2494.1080604@churchofreality.org>
Message-ID: <172D8C32-B8B9-4219-B410-F0E826C9EE23@difference.com.au>


On 31/01/2013, at 6:12 PM, Marc Perkel <marc at CHURCHOFREALITY.ORG> wrote:

> I'm leaning against the idea of diversity/discrimination in decision making bodies unless there is a reason to do so. One can not assume that discrimination exists by default. I don't know if you are talking about this email group or not but I have no idea what color/gender/or sexual orientation anyone on this list is.

	And you will note ICANN does not attempt to determine ethnicity or sexual orientation in its diversity processes. 
	Our gender diversity requirements are fairly simple, and apart from a couple of small areas within the community, fairly easily met. I can actually recall only one time in NCSG when gender diversity was as issue in choosing an NCSG rep, and I was the person who voluntarily stepped down from consideration for gender diversity reasons, and I was happy to to do so. 
	Geographical diversity is, in my opinion, absolutely essential for ICANN. 
	It is essential to ICANN to actually represent the world. If we do not enforce geographical diversity, many sections of ICANN will cheerily slip into being mostly run from North America. 
	
> Nor do I care. I see it as a distinction without a difference.
> 
> I myself am a cybernetic artificial life form from the future. I come from the planet Kolob. We are an androgynous species. We reproduce by mitosis, which is splitting in half creating 2 individuals. We are either invisible or appear to be whatever shape we choose to make you puny humans feel comfortable. We are a telepathic race and share a singular consciousness. I communicate with you using a subspace inter-dimentional modem.

	I'm sorry, but where you are born isn't relevant. Where you are resident, however, is. Sub-space modern or whatever, where do you receive your mail? 
	Before mocking the rules, it would help to understand it. 
	Cheers
		David
		
> 
> On 1/31/2013 5:51 PM, Andrew A. Adams wrote:
>> Dan and Avri's points are both well-made and strong further arguments for
>> supporting decent diversity requirements in decision-making bodies.
>> 
>> A further point is that such bodies interact and again we see that same
>> dynamic. For small bodies with tens of members it is hard to get
>> representation of all groups (and of course individual differences between
>> members of groups are as large as the differences between groups on many
>> occasions). So, for groups which are relatively small percentages of the
>> overall population (LGBT, to the best of my knowledge are only a few
>> percentage of the entire population) it is difficult to require a group of
>> only ten to always have one LGBT member. Within the broader set of groups,
>> however, there should be efforts made to ensure that out of the perhaps few
>> hundreds of representatives (and over time, multiples of that) that at least
>> some of these representatives are from these small groups. Again, the local
>> maximum of one committee and one term should be leavened with understanding
>> of the longer term benefits of diversity.
>> 
>> Avri's point about how one measures these things applies across all of these
>> broad considerations also provides us with ethical guidance pointing towards
>> requiring best efforts in diversity within groups, across groups and over
>> time, while maintaining open and transparent definitions of "Minimum
>> Competence" required (and providing avenues to gain the necessary competences
>> for those in under-represented groups). ICANN's Fellowship Program is, I
>> think, a good example of an effort to provide better geographic diversity,
>> though there may be room to expand upon it to cover other under- or
>> un-represented minority groups rather than simply developed/developing nation
>> citizenship/residency.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 




From dave  Fri Feb  1 18:30:44 2013
From: dave (David Cake)
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 08:30:44 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [NCSG-Discuss] On Diversity and Discrimination
In-Reply-To: <172D8C32-B8B9-4219-B410-F0E826C9EE23@difference.com.au>
References: <201302010004.r1104vv3032443@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<C693E24D-6C65-4A5D-8327-E88E4D481CFE@acm.org>
	<dc57a5feaf2405d82bd53393220464e8.squirrel@webmail.musicunbound.com>
	<201302010151.r111pj6t000568@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<510B2494.1080604@churchofreality.org>
	<172D8C32-B8B9-4219-B410-F0E826C9EE23@difference.com.au>
Message-ID: <5EA58F2C-60D4-4F83-9A11-61B63D9D1CD9@difference.com.au>


	My apology for cross-posting this nonsense to the PC. 



From avri  Fri Feb  1 21:35:17 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 11:35:17 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [] On Diversity and Discrimination
In-Reply-To: <5EA58F2C-60D4-4F83-9A11-61B63D9D1CD9@difference.com.au>
References: <201302010004.r1104vv3032443@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<C693E24D-6C65-4A5D-8327-E88E4D481CFE@acm.org>
	<dc57a5feaf2405d82bd53393220464e8.squirrel@webmail.musicunbound.com>
	<201302010151.r111pj6t000568@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<510B2494.1080604@churchofreality.org>
	<172D8C32-B8B9-4219-B410-F0E826C9EE23@difference.com.au>
	<5EA58F2C-60D4-4F83-9A11-61B63D9D1CD9@difference.com.au>
Message-ID: <DBD76978-2CC1-4541-802C-478A92F5F6D6@acm.org>

Hi,

I don't think it is nonsense at all.  I think it is an important discussion, even if some of the argumentation is a bit fanciful at times.

avri

On 1 Feb 2013, at 08:30, David Cake wrote:

> 
> 	My apology for cross-posting this nonsense to the PC. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 




From avri  Sat Feb  2 21:16:03 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 11:16:03 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] wiki pages
Message-ID: <B283D2FD-564D-4214-B5F2-0A748C1EE956@acm.org>

hi,

Was feeling organizationally inclined this morning.  Something that comes and goes in short bursts so figured I would do something about it.


As the policy committee work pages had gone into disuse, i spruced them up.

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Issues

All of the old stuff is still there in:

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Issues+-+Pre+2013

I added a table of work group etc (WGetc) participants, and filled my name in a few of the squares.  others could add themselves and we should add the names of people not on the PC who we know are participating in WGetc.

I updated the comment tracking page and put myself in a few spots.  others could add themselves in appropriate volunteering spots.  i figure more than one person can volunteer to work on something.
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments

I add a cheat sheet work pages.  This is for tracking the action item that came out of the discussions with Fadi last week.
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Cheat+Sheets

avri





From robin  Sat Feb  2 21:55:02 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 11:55:02 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
Message-ID: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>

Dear NCSG-PC Members:

We should elect a Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee to help better  
organize and track NCSG's participation in ICANN policy development.   
We never really talked about what duties should be undertaken by the  
person who is elected to serve as NCSG-PC's Chair, but we should  
before we elect one, so everyone is clear about expectations and  
responsibilities.  It seems there are 4 basic duties that we need our  
NCSG-PC Chair to be responsible for and I've tried to outline them  
below.  This is just a first stab to get the conversation going of  
what we need so feel free to suggest more or less than what is  
below.  It also occurs to me that because this is not an  
insignificant undertaking, we may want to consider having a PC Chair  
and also an Alternate Chair to share responsibility, or otherwise  
divide the labor and responsibility so it isn't all on one person.   
Thoughts?

Best,
Robin


Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee:

1.  Comment Periods
Keep track of ICANN public comment periods and assist with drafting  
and filing of member comments in coordination with NCSG-PC members,  
NCSG working group representatives and other NCSG members and  
constituencies.  This means encouraging both individual NCSG members  
to file individual comments and also the drafting and filing of  
official NCSG statements.  For NCSG statements, NCSG-PC Chair will  
call for "rough consensus" of NCSG-PC members regarding any  
particular statement and determine the reaching of rough consensus as  
per NCSG Charter.

2. Other NCSG Statements
Organize the drafting of other policy statements made in NCSG's name  
including the specific policy issue summaries requested by CEO (aka  
"policy cheat sheets").  NCSG-Chair does not have to personally "hold  
the drafting pen" on every statement, but rather, the Chair will  
recruit the person responsible for holding the drafting pen on any  
particular statement.

3.  Working Groups
Keep track of GNSO and other ICANN policy working groups and  
encourage participation from NCSG members in those policy working  
groups.  Endeavor to find adequate NCSG member participation and  
other noncommercial expertise in the policy working groups of concern  
to NCSG members.

4.  NCSG Policy Calls
Participate in the monthly NCSG Policy calls and send out a brief  
"voting guide" after the call to NCSG-PC members to summarize  
discussions on how NCSG GNSO Councilors intend to vote on motions  
pending before the next GNSO Council Meeting.




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130202/a7a1c4d0/attachment.html>


From avri  Sat Feb  2 23:05:35 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 13:05:35 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>

> It also occurs to me that because this is not an insignificant undertaking, we may want to consider having a PC Chair and also an Alternate Chair to share responsibility, or otherwise divide the labor and responsibility so it isn't all on one person.  Thoughts?

Yes, I nominate Wendy as PC chair.

No, i did not ask her first.

cheers,

avri

On 2 Feb 2013, at 11:55, Robin Gross wrote:

> Dear NCSG-PC Members:
> 
> We should elect a Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee to help better organize and track NCSG's participation in ICANN policy development.  We never really talked about what duties should be undertaken by the person who is elected to serve as NCSG-PC's Chair, but we should before we elect one, so everyone is clear about expectations and responsibilities.  It seems there are 4 basic duties that we need our NCSG-PC Chair to be responsible for and I've tried to outline them below.  This is just a first stab to get the conversation going of what we need so feel free to suggest more or less than what is below.  It also occurs to me that because this is not an insignificant undertaking, we may want to consider having a PC Chair and also an Alternate Chair to share responsibility, or otherwise divide the labor and responsibility so it isn't all on one person.  Thoughts?
> 
> Best,
> Robin
> 
> 
> Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee:
> 
> 1.  Comment Periods
> Keep track of ICANN public comment periods and assist with drafting and filing of member comments in coordination with NCSG-PC members, NCSG working group representatives and other NCSG members and constituencies.  This means encouraging both individual NCSG members to file individual comments and also the drafting and filing of official NCSG statements.  For NCSG statements, NCSG-PC Chair will call for "rough consensus" of NCSG-PC members regarding any particular statement and determine the reaching of rough consensus as per NCSG Charter.
> 
> 2. Other NCSG Statements
> Organize the drafting of other policy statements made in NCSG's name including the specific policy issue summaries requested by CEO (aka "policy cheat sheets").  NCSG-Chair does not have to personally "hold the drafting pen" on every statement, but rather, the Chair will recruit the person responsible for holding the drafting pen on any particular statement.
> 
> 3.  Working Groups
> Keep track of GNSO and other ICANN policy working groups and encourage participation from NCSG members in those policy working groups.  Endeavor to find adequate NCSG member participation and other noncommercial expertise in the policy working groups of concern to NCSG members.
> 
> 4.  NCSG Policy Calls
> Participate in the monthly NCSG Policy calls and send out a brief "voting guide" after the call to NCSG-PC members to summarize discussions on how NCSG GNSO Councilors intend to vote on motions pending before the next GNSO Council Meeting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From Mary.Wong  Mon Feb  4 19:54:03 2013
From: Mary.Wong (Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu)
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:54:03 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
 Committee
In-Reply-To: <19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
Message-ID: <510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>


I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion of an Alternate Chair is a great one. 

And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :) 

And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
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:  
Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> 

To: 
"NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>" <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

Date:  
2/2/2013 4:05 PM 

Subject:  
Re: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee 

> It also occurs to me that because this is not an insignificant undertaking, we may want to consider having a PC Chair and also an Alternate Chair to share responsibility, or otherwise divide the labor and responsibility so it isn't all on one person.  Thoughts

Yes, I nominate Wendy as PC chair.

No, i did not ask her first.

cheers,

avri

On 2 Feb 2013, at 11:55, Robin Gross wrote:

> Dear NCSG-PC Members:
>
> We should elect a Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee to help better organize and track NCSG's participation in ICANN policy development.  We never really talked about what duties should be undertaken by the person who is elected to serve as NCSG-PC's Chair, but we should before we elect one, so everyone is clear about expectations and responsibilities.  It seems there are 4 basic duties that we need our NCSG-PC Chair to be responsible for and I've tried to outline them below.  This is just a first stab to get the conversation going of what we need so feel free to suggest more or less than what is below.  It also occurs to me that because this is not an insignificant undertaking, we may want to consider having a PC Chair and also an Alternate Chair to share responsibility, or otherwise divide the labor and responsibility so it isn't all on one person.  Thoughts?
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
>
> Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee:
>
> 1.  Comment Periods
> Keep track of ICANN public comment periods and assist with drafting and filing of member comments in coordination with NCSG-PC members, NCSG working group representatives and other NCSG members and constituencies.  This means encouraging both individual NCSG members to file individual comments and also the drafting and filing of official NCSG statements.  For NCSG statements, NCSG-PC Chair will call for "rough consensus" of NCSG-PC members regarding any particular statement and determine the reaching of rough consensus as per NCSG Charter.
>
> 2. Other NCSG Statements
> Organize the drafting of other policy statements made in NCSG's name including the specific policy issue summaries requested by CEO (aka "policy cheat sheets").  NCSG-Chair does not have to personally "hold the drafting pen" on every statement, but rather, the Chair will recruit the person responsible for holding the drafting pen on any particular statement.
>
> 3.  Working Groups
> Keep track of GNSO and other ICANN policy working groups and encourage participation from NCSG members in those policy working groups.  Endeavor to find adequate NCSG member participation and other noncommercial expertise in the policy working groups of concern to NCSG members.
>
> 4.  NCSG Policy Calls
> Participate in the monthly NCSG Policy calls and send out a brief "voting guide" after the call to NCSG-PC members to summarize discussions on how NCSG GNSO Councilors intend to vote on motions pending before the next GNSO Council Meeting.
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg


_______________________________________________
PC-NCSG mailing list
PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130204/6fcf53fe/attachment.html>


From robin  Wed Feb  6 06:00:04 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 20:00:04 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] 12 February 21:00 UTC--NCSG Open Policy Call - agenda &
	participation details
Message-ID: <57040FB0-C986-4F8A-9639-8B3C9F504346@ipjustice.org>

Dear All:

I hope you all will join in next week's NCSG Open Policy Meeting,  
which is an open discussion between the NCSG Policy Committee,  
including the NCSG GNSO Councilors and the entire NCSG membership.   
The meeting is held next Tuesday, 2 days before the next GNSO Council  
meeting to help prepare for NCSG's participation in that meeting.   
Dial-in and remote participation details are below.  Also below is a  
draft discussion agenda.  If anyone needs a dial-out, please let me  
know at least 24-hours before the meeting to ensure we have enough  
time to make the dial-out happen.   Thank you!

Best,
Robin

NCSG Policy Open Meeting
12 February 2013
21:00 - 23:00 UTC

Other Time Zones:
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=NCSG+Open 
+Policy+Meeting+February+2013&iso=20130212T21&p1=1440&ah=2

Remote Participation Details:
Telephone:  http://ipjustice.org/ICANN/NCSG/NCSG_Passcodes.htm
Adobe Connect:  https://icann.adobeconnect.com/_a819976787/ncsg/

Draft Discussion Agenda:

I.  Discussion of Intercessional Meeting in LA
Update
Next Steps

II.  Preparation for GNSO Council Meeting of 14 February 2013
Agenda & motions TBD:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Council 
+Meeting+2013-02-14

III.  Other Policy Issues:

1.  Special Privileges for RedCross, Olympic Cmtes, IGO's?
IGO-INGO Working Group
NCSG Input Statement

2.  Strawman Model & Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH)
NCSG Statement (link)
GNSO Response

3.  Prep for Beijing ICANN Meeting
Start to Consider: What policy issues do we want to discuss with  
ICANN Board, with At-Large, topics for Public Forum?


IV.  Open ICANN Public Comments Periods:

1.  "Closed Generic" TLDs:
http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13- 
en.htm
Comment Close: 7 March 2013

2.  Policy vs Implementation:
http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/policy- 
implementation-31jan13-en.htm
Comment Close: 21 Feb. 2013
Reply Comment Close: 14 March 2013
ICANN staff paper - draft framework for discussion:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation- 
framework-08jan13-en.pdf


V. AOB?






IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130205/767b439a/attachment.html>


From robin  Thu Feb  7 04:16:09 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 18:16:09 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] first draft of NCSG response on IGO / INGO input form
In-Reply-To: <3BC17A31-699C-4B7E-90E4-75C06A3CF666@difference.com.au>
References: <84D28465-E27D-4D01-B0A9-71EF97F0116F@ipjustice.org>
	<2E8B9772-8234-469C-AED2-052896CFFDCC@ipjustice.org>
	<3BC17A31-699C-4B7E-90E4-75C06A3CF666@difference.com.au>
Message-ID: <D7395888-B816-4D46-8F6D-3E1827053932@ipjustice.org>

Dear All,

Please see the attached revised draft to incorporate the additional  
points raised so far.

We are already late on submitting this input form to the IGO-INGO  
working group, but I'd still like to do so by the end of the week.   
So please send any additional comments, edits, etc in the next 48- 
hours to this NCSG-PC mailing list so we can submit our input  
statement by week's end.

Thanks to all who have contributed thus far.  All are welcome to  
provide further input.  Thanks again!

Best,
Robin

?


On Jan 21, 2013, at 6:45 PM, David Cake wrote:

>
> 	I would add to the response to question 4 something about the  
> widely varying legal basis of the protection claims.
>
> 	Question 7 I would suggest some thing like 'Even if there is found  
> to be a need and legal basis for rights protection for the RCRC and  
> IOC as part of this policy process, the current existing  
> restrictions where not developed based on that process and should  
> be replaced with mechanisms that are. '
>
> 	Regards
>
> 		David




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130206/b7a7299d/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IGO-INGO_Input_Request_NCSG_v2.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 44032 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130206/b7a7299d/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130206/b7a7299d/attachment-0003.html>


From robin  Thu Feb  7 21:18:10 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:18:10 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [liaison6c] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday,
	14 February 2013 at 11:00UTC:
References: <C4B5E5D7461AB54B875986D2919CBB5FD243F92CCB@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
Message-ID: <191E41DF-279A-45F3-9039-4C4FFC12FA30@ipjustice.org>

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org>
> Date: February 7, 2013 10:35:42 AM PST
> To: liaison6c <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: [liaison6c] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 14  
> February 2013 at 11:00UTC:
>
>
> Dear Councillors,
> Please find the draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on:
> The agenda is published on pages:
>
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14feb13-en.htm
>
> On the Wiki at:
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+-+14 
> +February+2013
>
> Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 2013
> This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating  
> Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and  
> updated.
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12- 
> en.pdf
> For convenience:
> An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is  
> provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
> An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the  
> absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of  
> this agenda.
> Meeting Times 11:00 UTC
> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5
> Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC
> 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris;  
> 00:00 Wellington
>
> Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members.  
> Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial  
> out call is needed.
> GNSO Council meeting audio cast
> http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u
> Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
> 1.1 Roll Call
>
> 1.2 Statement of interest updates
> 1.3 Review/amend agenda
> 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the Council meeting on 17  
> January 2013 have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures  
> and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January 2013 will be  
> approved on 8 February 2013 per the GNSO Operating Procedures:
> Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes)
> Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics
> Include brief review of Projects List and Action List
> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
>
> Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSION ? Recent meetings in Amsterdam & LA  
> (15 minutes)
>
> Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA.  This item  
> provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues  
> arising.
>
> 4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben)
> 4.2 Discussion
> 4.3 Next steps (if any)
>
> Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH)  
> Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes)
>
> ICANN?s CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman  
> Proposal  developed through the TMCH related implementation  
> discussions, which has been posted for public comment.http:// 
> www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm.   
> ICANN?s CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint  
> proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property  
> Constituency (BC/IPC) for a ?limited preventative registration  
> mechanism? which is also currently available for public comment.  A  
> subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN?s CEO clarified the  
> desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013.
>
> Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http:// 
> gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of  
> defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a  
> previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2).  The  
> New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether  
> additional work on defensive registrations at the second level  
> should be undertaken.
>
> The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN  
> CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any  
> additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff  
> briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations.
>
> 5.1 Update (Mason Cole)
> 5.2 Discussion
> 5.3 Next Steps
> Item 6: DISCUSION ? Board requested advice on second level  
> protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (10 minutes)
>
> At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested  that the GNSO  
> continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level  
> protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis.
>
> In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the  
> Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any  
> concern such as with the global public interest or the security or  
> stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in  
> making its decision about whether to include second level  
> protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a  
> Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant  
> Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the  
> first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be  
> protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under  
> the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int  
> gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of  
> eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be  
> listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the  
> delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013.
>
>
> 6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert)
> 6.2 Discussion
> 6.3 Next steps (if any)
> Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSION ? The issue of "closed generic"  
> TLDs (10 minutes)
>
> The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to  
> request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed  
> generic" TLDs, , concurrent with the opening of the public comment  
> forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on  
> this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public  
> comment forum. (7 March)
>
> 7.1 Update
> 7.2 Discussion
> 7.3 Next steps (if any)
> Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSION ? Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes)
>
> The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to  
> work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue  
> regarding the boundary between policy development and  
> implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy  
> development and integration work from the outset.
>
> Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there  
> is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same  
> time, ICANN Staff has published a paper  that is intended to  
> facilitate further community discussions on this topic.
>
> 8.1 Discussion
> 8.2 Next steps
>
>
> Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and  
> Reveal Study (10 minutes)
> At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results  
> of the survey that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future  
> in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal  
> requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and  
> Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead  
> with the study.
>
> 9.1 ? Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman)
> 9.2 ? Discussion
> 9.3 ? Next steps
>
> Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION ? Planning for Beijing (10 minutes)
>
> Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at  
> the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning.  Council VC  
> Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council  
> has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback
>
> 10.1 ? Update (Mason Cole)
> 10.2 ? Discussion
> 10.3 ? Next steps
>
> Item 11:  Any Other Business (5 minutes)
> Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article  
> X, Section 3)
> 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto,  
> or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a  
> GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple  
> majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below  
> shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
> a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more  
> than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
> b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as  
> described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than  
> one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one  
> House.
> c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of  
> GNSO Supermajority.
> d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an  
> affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more  
> than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
> e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires  
> an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
> f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team  
> Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve  
> an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each  
> House.
> g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of  
> a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for  
> significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO  
> Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
> h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority:  
> requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and  
> further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at  
> least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
> i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires  
> an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
> j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain  
> Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies  
> that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence  
> of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to  
> be met or exceeded.
> k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final  
> Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be  
> modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority  
> vote.
> l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the  
> Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one  
> House and a majority of the other House."
> Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures  
> v2.5)
> 4.4.1 Applicability
> Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of  
> Council motions or measures.
> a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
> b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
> c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or  
> ICANN Bylaws;
> d. Fill a Council position open for election.
> 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within  
> the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the  
> meeting?s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at  
> the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or  
> extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is  
> verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
> 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate  
> absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide  
> reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee  
> ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web- 
> based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
> 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements.  
> (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is  
> initiated.)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN  
> hemisphere
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> California, USA (PST) UTC-8+0DST 03:00
> New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00
> Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
> Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
> Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
> London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
> Abuja, Nigeria (WAT) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST) UTC+2+0DST 13:00
> Karachi, Pakistan (PKT ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00
> Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
> Perth, Australia (WST) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
> Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 ? next day
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00  
> local time (with exceptions)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com
> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
> Thank you.
> Kind regards,
> Glen
> Glen de Saint G?ry
> GNSO Secretariat
> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
> http://gnso.icann.org
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130207/a06fd3c5/attachment-0001.html>


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter  Thu Feb  7 21:24:56 2013
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:24:56 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [liaison6c] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday,
 14 February 2013 at 11:00UTC:
References: <C4B5E5D7461AB54B875986D2919CBB5FD243F92CCB@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
	<191E41DF-279A-45F3-9039-4C4FFC12FA30@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

 
Hi friends,
 
I need a proxy for the GNSO Council meeting. I am with the OSCE Internet Freedom Conference in Vienna and will sit on a panel which is in conflict. I could probably join the second hour (when there is a lunch break) but to be on the safe side - in patricular if it comes to voting - please indicate who could take my proxy.
 
Best wishes
 
wolfgang
 
 
BTW, I was online today with the Informal Expert Group (IEG) for the WTPF in May in Geneva. I am afraid, that ICANN issues will be more and more pulled into the ITU environment probably peaking in October 2014, when the ITU has to renegoiate its mandate in the constitution and convention in Korea.    
 

 
________________________________

Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von Robin Gross
Gesendet: Do 07.02.2013 20:18
An: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
Betreff: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [liaison6c] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday,14 February 2013 at 11:00UTC:


Begin forwarded message:


	From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org>
	Date: February 7, 2013 10:35:42 AM PST
	To: liaison6c <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>
	Subject: [liaison6c] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 11:00UTC:

	
	 
	Dear Councillors,
	Please find the draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on:

	The agenda is published on pages:

	http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb
	http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14feb13-en.htm
	
	On the Wiki at:
	https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+-+14+February+2013
	
	Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 2013
	This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated.
	http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf
	For convenience:

	*	An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. 
	*	An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.

	Meeting Times 11:00 UTC <http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> 
	http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5

	Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC
	03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris; 00:00 Wellington

	Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed.
	GNSO Council meeting audio cast
	http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u <http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u> 
	Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
	1.1 Roll Call
	
	1.2 Statement of interest updates
	1.3 Review/amend agenda
	1.4. Note the status of minutes for the Council meeting on 17 January 2013 <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-17jan13-en.htm>  have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January 2013 <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg14133.html>  will be approved on 8 February 2013 per the GNSO Operating Procedures:
	Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes)
	Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics
	Include brief review of Projects List <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf>  and Action List <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> 
	Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
	
	
	
	

	Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSION - Recent meetings in Amsterdam & LA (15 minutes)

	Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA.  This item provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues arising.

	4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben)
	4.2 Discussion
	4.3 Next steps (if any)
	 
	Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes)
	 
	ICANN's CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman Proposal <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/chehade-to-robinson-04dec12-en.pdf>   developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment.http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en..htm> .  ICANN's CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a "limited preventative registration mechanism" which is also currently available for public comment.  A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN's CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013.
	  

	Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287 <http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287> ) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2).  The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken. 

	The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations.

	5.1 Update (Mason Cole)
	5.2 Discussion
	5.3 Next Steps

	Item 6: DISCUSION - Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (10 minutes)

	At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested  that the GNSO continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis.

	In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any concern such as with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013.

	 
	6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert)
	6.2 Discussion
	6.3 Next steps (if any)

	Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSION - The issue of "closed generic" TLDs (10 minutes)

	The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed generic" TLDs, , concurrent with the opening of the public comment forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public comment forum. (7 March)
	 
	7.1 Update
	7.2 Discussion
	7.3 Next steps (if any)

	Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSION - Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes)

	The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset.

	Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08jan13-en.pdf>   that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic.
	 
	8.1 Discussion
	8.2 Next steps
	 
	
	
	Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (10 minutes)
	At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey <http://toronto45.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/presentation-whois-survey-17oct12-en.pdf>  that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study.
	 
	9.1 - Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman)
	9.2 - Discussion
	9.3 - Next steps
	 
	Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - Planning for Beijing (10 minutes)
	 
	Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning.  Council VC Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback
	 
	10.1 - Update (Mason Cole)
	10.2 - Discussion
	10.3 - Next steps
	 
	Item 11:  Any Other Business (5 minutes)
	Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3)
	9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
	a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
	b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> ): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
	c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority.
	d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
	e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
	f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
	g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
	h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
	i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
	j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
	k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
	l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House."
	Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures v2.5) <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf> 
	4.4.1 Applicability
	Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures.
	a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
	b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
	c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
	d. Fill a Council position open for election.
	4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
	4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
	4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.)
	---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
	Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere 
	---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
	Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 
	----------------------------------------------------------------------------
	California, USA (PST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html> ) UTC-8+0DST 03:00
	New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00
	Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
	Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst..html> ) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
	Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
	London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 
	Abuja, Nigeria (WAT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html> ) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
	Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 
	Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 
	Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.html> ) UTC+2+0DST 13:00
	Karachi, Pakistan (PKT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html>  ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00 
	Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 
	Perth, Australia (WST <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 
	Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html>  ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 - next day 
	---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
	The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions)
	---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
	For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com <http://www.timeanddate.com/> 
	http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5
	Please let me know if you have any questions.
	Thank you.
	Kind regards,
	Glen
	Glen de Saint G?ry
	GNSO Secretariat
	gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
	http://gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> 
	 





IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org <http://www.ipjustice.org/>      e: robin at ipjustice.org






From avri  Fri Feb  8 12:12:49 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 05:12:49 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Where are we at on work items?
Message-ID: <CAB9A8CE-7CBD-4E3D-B201-BEFAB15F913F@acm.org>

Hi,

[since the IEG is on coffee break, I might as well take advantage of being up and awake at 5 am]

With the revision of the web site, I have started to work on the web pages for the NCSG-PC
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Development

I know I presumed a bit in taking it on myself to just do this, but it can all be changed.  And I did let this list I would be doing this.  I think.

Changes made:

1. Public comment tracking

The table contains the public comments.  I have added my name to some of the tasks.  Perhaps others in the PC-NCSG want to do something similar.

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments-Current

2. NCSG participation in WG, Teams etc.

I created a table, but it is still sparse.  We should record who the NCSG (either NCUC, NPOC or non-aligned) participants are.

3. Cheat sheets requested by Fadi & thought to be useful for the membership.  I think this is a work item for us.

Created a table and signed up for one topic myself.

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Cheat+Sheets

Once you all have reviewed etc, I would like to inform the NCSG-DISCUSS list.

cheers

avri





From avri  Fri Feb  8 12:33:15 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 05:33:15 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Where are we at on work items?
In-Reply-To: <CAB9A8CE-7CBD-4E3D-B201-BEFAB15F913F@acm.org>
References: <CAB9A8CE-7CBD-4E3D-B201-BEFAB15F913F@acm.org>
Message-ID: <D4D25BB0-8344-4766-9809-923472760B32@acm.org>

Ooh, I see I already sort of sent this info out before.

But perhaps people missed it the first time as no one edited the files at all.  
I had doubt that I had actually sent it before.  
Should have checked.

In any case, the pages are still there in the new organization, and the urls in the email below are the new ones.

avri

On 8 Feb 2013, at 05:12, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> [since the IEG is on coffee break, I might as well take advantage of being up and awake at 5 am]
> 
> With the revision of the web site, I have started to work on the web pages for the NCSG-PC
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Development
> 
> I know I presumed a bit in taking it on myself to just do this, but it can all be changed.  And I did let this list I would be doing this.  I think.
> 
> Changes made:
> 
> 1. Public comment tracking
> 
> The table contains the public comments.  I have added my name to some of the tasks.  Perhaps others in the PC-NCSG want to do something similar.
> 
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments-Current
> 
> 2. NCSG participation in WG, Teams etc.
> 
> I created a table, but it is still sparse.  We should record who the NCSG (either NCUC, NPOC or non-aligned) participants are.
> 
> 3. Cheat sheets requested by Fadi & thought to be useful for the membership.  I think this is a work item for us.
> 
> Created a table and signed up for one topic myself.
> 
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Cheat+Sheets
> 
> Once you all have reviewed etc, I would like to inform the NCSG-DISCUSS list.
> 
> cheers
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 




From avri  Fri Feb  8 23:43:18 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 16:43:18 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
Message-ID: <97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>


On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion of an Alternate Chair is a great one.
> 
> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)
> 
> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)

thanks.

but sure 
if we have an alternate chair,
i am willing to stand for alternate chair.

avri




From robin  Sun Feb 10 00:01:43 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 14:01:43 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] volunteers for 2 proxies for GNSO Council this week?
Message-ID: <8E54FC5C-2B10-4C5A-8951-0026EAA10C98@ipjustice.org>

Dear NCSG GNSO Councilors:

We need two proxies for this week's GNSO Council meeting (Wolfgang &  
Magaly can't participate in Thursday's GNSO Council mtg).

Any volunteers from our remaining Councilors to will serve as the  
proxy for Wolfang & Magaly?   We need 2 different people since a  
Councilor can only hold one proxy at a time.

Please let me know before Tuesday when I fly to Vienna and will be  
offline for a day at least.

Thanks!
Robin




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130209/57713bf3/attachment.html>


From robin  Sun Feb 10 00:42:57 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 14:42:57 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Where are we at on work items?
In-Reply-To: <CAB9A8CE-7CBD-4E3D-B201-BEFAB15F913F@acm.org>
References: <CAB9A8CE-7CBD-4E3D-B201-BEFAB15F913F@acm.org>
Message-ID: <6E0DD3E1-2DE3-4B35-8D8C-D056D3DC1F3B@ipjustice.org>

This is great, Avri!   Thanks so much for your help getting us  
organized on this front!

Best,
Robin


On Feb 8, 2013, at 2:12 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> [since the IEG is on coffee break, I might as well take advantage  
> of being up and awake at 5 am]
>
> With the revision of the web site, I have started to work on the  
> web pages for the NCSG-PC
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Development
>
> I know I presumed a bit in taking it on myself to just do this, but  
> it can all be changed.  And I did let this list I would be doing  
> this.  I think.
>
> Changes made:
>
> 1. Public comment tracking
>
> The table contains the public comments.  I have added my name to  
> some of the tasks.  Perhaps others in the PC-NCSG want to do  
> something similar.
>
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments- 
> Current
>
> 2. NCSG participation in WG, Teams etc.
>
> I created a table, but it is still sparse.  We should record who  
> the NCSG (either NCUC, NPOC or non-aligned) participants are.
>
> 3. Cheat sheets requested by Fadi & thought to be useful for the  
> membership.  I think this is a work item for us.
>
> Created a table and signed up for one topic myself.
>
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Cheat 
> +Sheets
>
> Once you all have reviewed etc, I would like to inform the NCSG- 
> DISCUSS list.
>
> cheers
>
> avri
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130209/f6790e5f/attachment.html>


From avri  Sun Feb 10 02:28:32 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 19:28:32 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
Message-ID: <DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>

Hi,

I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.

I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.

Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:

>  Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
> intersect. 


avri


>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>> To: Fadi Chehade
>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>> governance academics.
>> 
>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>> 
>> Best of luck,
>> 
>> avri


I got permission to pass this on to co-workers

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
> 
> Dear Avri, 
> 
> 
> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
> 
> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
> 
> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
> well.
> 
> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
> 
> Kind regards, 
> 
> Christopher Mondini
> Vice President, Business Engagement
> 
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
> 
> chris.mondini at icann.org
> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
> 
> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
> 
> 




From robin  Sun Feb 10 02:59:57 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 16:59:57 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] first draft of NCSG response on IGO / INGO input form
In-Reply-To: <D7395888-B816-4D46-8F6D-3E1827053932@ipjustice.org>
References: <84D28465-E27D-4D01-B0A9-71EF97F0116F@ipjustice.org>
	<2E8B9772-8234-469C-AED2-052896CFFDCC@ipjustice.org>
	<3BC17A31-699C-4B7E-90E4-75C06A3CF666@difference.com.au>
	<D7395888-B816-4D46-8F6D-3E1827053932@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <7F3E19C3-C22A-419C-BED4-4F7A08CEBC41@ipjustice.org>

Not having heard any further input or objections to this statement on  
this list, I'll go ahead and submit it this weekend to the working  
group.

Best,
Robin


On Feb 6, 2013, at 6:16 PM, Robin Gross wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Please see the attached revised draft to incorporate the additional  
> points raised so far.
>
> We are already late on submitting this input form to the IGO-INGO  
> working group, but I'd still like to do so by the end of the week.   
> So please send any additional comments, edits, etc in the next 48- 
> hours to this NCSG-PC mailing list so we can submit our input  
> statement by week's end.
>
> Thanks to all who have contributed thus far.  All are welcome to  
> provide further input.  Thanks again!
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
> <IGO-INGO_Input_Request_NCSG_v2.doc>
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2013, at 6:45 PM, David Cake wrote:
>
>>
>> 	I would add to the response to question 4 something about the  
>> widely varying legal basis of the protection claims.
>>
>> 	Question 7 I would suggest some thing like 'Even if there is  
>> found to be a need and legal basis for rights protection for the  
>> RCRC and IOC as part of this policy process, the current existing  
>> restrictions where not developed based on that process and should  
>> be replaced with mechanisms that are. '
>>
>> 	Regards
>>
>> 		David
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130209/b42becc5/attachment-0001.html>


From william.drake  Sun Feb 10 11:41:25 2013
From: william.drake (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:41:25 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
Message-ID: <1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>

Hi

Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....

Bill

On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
> 
> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
> 
> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
> 
>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>> intersect.
> 
> 
> avri
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>> governance academics.
>>> 
>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>> 
>>> Best of luck,
>>> 
>>> avri
> 
> 
> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>> 
>> Dear Avri, 
>> 
>> 
>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>> 
>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>> 
>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>> well.
>> 
>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>> 
>> Kind regards, 
>> 
>> Christopher Mondini
>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>> 
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>> 
>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>> 
>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg



From wolfgang.kleinwaechter  Sun Feb 10 12:02:18 2013
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 11:02:18 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
 
wolfgang 

________________________________

Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
An: Avri Doria
Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables



Hi

Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....

Bill

On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>
> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>
> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
>
>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>> intersect.
>
>
> avri
>
>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>> governance academics.
>>>
>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>
>>> Best of luck,
>>>
>>> avri
>
>
> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>
>> Dear Avri,
>>
>>
>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>
>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>>
>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>> well.
>>
>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Christopher Mondini
>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>
>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>
>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

_______________________________________________
PC-NCSG mailing list
PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg





From avri  Sun Feb 10 16:13:34 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:13:34 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>

Hi,

Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that there are some that might see it as harmful.

I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern and the perspective these two groups take as very different.

I was looking for advice on the topic issue.

avri

On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:

> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
> 
> wolfgang 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
> An: Avri Doria
> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
> 
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>> 
>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>> 
>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
>> 
>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>> intersect.
>> 
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>>> governance academics.
>>>> 
>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>> 
>>>> Best of luck,
>>>> 
>>>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>> 
>>> Dear Avri,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>> 
>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>>> 
>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>>> well.
>>> 
>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> Christopher Mondini
>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>> 
>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>> 
>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>> 
>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> 
> 




From avri  Sun Feb 10 16:18:21 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:18:21 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
Message-ID: <0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>


Ps.  This is a discussion with us, the same old voices, though some may be invited, I have no idea.  This is about reaching out to the leaders who may not be participating.  We have a lot of problem getting many of the premiere NGOs participating so that was my first priority in making the personal suggestion I made - I did not make it as a NCSG member.   Talking to academic too, was a further thought, but as I say, academics are different from NGO activists and have different concerns and modalities.

avri


On 10 Feb 2013, at 09:13, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that there are some that might see it as harmful.
> 
> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern and the perspective these two groups take as very different.
> 
> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
> 
>> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
>> 
>> wolfgang 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
>> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
>> An: Avri Doria
>> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>>> 
>>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>>> 
>>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
>>> 
>>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>> intersect.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>>>> governance academics.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best of luck,
>>>>> 
>>>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>>> 
>>>> Dear Avri,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>>> 
>>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>>>> 
>>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>>>> well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Christopher Mondini
>>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>>> 
>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>>> 
>>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>>> 
>>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 




From avri  Sun Feb 10 16:41:31 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:41:31 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
Message-ID: <408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>

Correction.

This is _not_ a discussions with us, the same old voices ...


On 10 Feb 2013, at 09:18, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> Ps.  This is a discussion with us, the same old voices, though some may be invited, I have no idea.  This is about reaching out to the leaders who may not be participating.  We have a lot of problem getting many of the premiere NGOs participating so that was my first priority in making the personal suggestion I made - I did not make it as a NCSG member.   Talking to academic too, was a further thought, but as I say, academics are different from NGO activists and have different concerns and modalities.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 10 Feb 2013, at 09:13, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that there are some that might see it as harmful.
>> 
>> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern and the perspective these two groups take as very different.
>> 
>> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
>> 
>>> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
>>> 
>>> wolfgang 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> 
>>> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
>>> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
>>> An: Avri Doria
>>> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
>>> 
>>> Bill
>>> 
>>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>>>> 
>>>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>>>> 
>>>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
>>>> 
>>>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>>> intersect.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> avri
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>>>>> governance academics.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best of luck,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> avri
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>>>> 
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>>>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>>>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>>>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>>>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dear Avri,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>>>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>>>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>>>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>>>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>>>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>>>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>>>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>>>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>>>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>>>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>>>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>>>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>>>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>>>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>>>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>>>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>>>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>>>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>>>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>>>>> well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Christopher Mondini
>>>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>>>> 
>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>>>> 
>>>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>>>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>>>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 




From william.drake  Sun Feb 10 18:23:37 2013
From: william.drake (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:23:37 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
Message-ID: <F3E41C0C-710D-4176-B6D5-FD05DDF60306@uzh.ch>

Hi

On Feb 10, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that there are some that might see it as harmful.

I can't say I understand this from either a substantive or NCUC perspective; it seems like the same debate we had with Alain sometime ago when he wanted thought the academics should be split off from NCUC.  
> 
> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern and the perspective these two groups take as very different.

I've not notice this in four+ years.  Could you give some examples?

BTW have people read the transcripts of Fadi's meeting with CSG in LA?  He apparently has an activity in the works that you'd have thought CS might have been consulted on?maybe ALAC has?

from p. 27


we will be doing a series of events around the planet called Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance - we're dubbing them MIG Works. Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance Works. The first MIG Works will be in the Arab region and the second one will be in Africa (this Dubai).

We're doing both of these in March by the way, doing these not as ICANN but with the rest of our fellow organizations ,so ISOC is involved, the RRI's are involved - all of these organizations are involved with us in this effort. This is not an effort to talk to governments, this is an effort to talk to the multi- stakeholders in this region and to tell them two things. That multi- stakeholders works and that's how it works and secondly to engage them in participating in the multi-stakeholder (in Dubai).


Anyone here approached by staff about participating in MIG Works meetings?

Could this be part of what Miss Cade had in mind in saying that CS knows nuttin about Internet governance?to discourage our inclusion in such?  I wasn't in the room when she said it, to my regret?

BD


> 
> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
> 
>> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
>> 
>> wolfgang 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
>> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
>> An: Avri Doria
>> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>>> 
>>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>>> 
>>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be ideas on:
>>> 
>>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>> intersect.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
>>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
>>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
>>>>> governance academics.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best of luck,
>>>>> 
>>>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>>> 
>>>> Dear Avri,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
>>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
>>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
>>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
>>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
>>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
>>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
>>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
>>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>>> 
>>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
>>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
>>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
>>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
>>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
>>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
>>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
>>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>>>> 
>>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
>>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
>>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
>>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
>>>> well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Christopher Mondini
>>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>>> 
>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>>> 
>>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>>> 
>>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/dd6fa80f/attachment.html>


From robin  Sun Feb 10 20:07:08 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:07:08 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <F3E41C0C-710D-4176-B6D5-FD05DDF60306@uzh.ch>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<F3E41C0C-710D-4176-B6D5-FD05DDF60306@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <F0F3E5A9-9C19-4721-8A72-C247AA247A3A@ipjustice.org>

I think we should send a letter to Fadi and ask that he include Non- 
Commercial participants in these engagement plans.

ICANN is making all sorts of plans to engage business these days.   
And these MIG initiatives should certainly include non-commercial  
actors.  If we send a simple friendly letter welcoming further  
engagement, but reminding them we need to be a part of these  
engagement initiatives, it could be helpful.   If ICANN wants to say  
it is "bottom up", it has to include us bottom-dwellers in the  
plans.  And we can also put an ask for the civil society roundtable  
in writing on the ICANN website, where ICANN will have to publicly  
respond.  Let's see if we can encourage the new leadership to  
understand the importance of reaching out to non-commercial  
participants with the same zeal it does to commercial participants.

Thanks,
Robin



On Feb 10, 2013, at 8:23 AM, William Drake wrote:

> Hi
>
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one  
>> and suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will  
>> mention that there are some that might see it as harmful.
>
> I can't say I understand this from either a substantive or NCUC  
> perspective; it seems like the same debate we had with Alain  
> sometime ago when he wanted thought the academics should be split  
> off from NCUC.
>>
>> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different  
>> perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of  
>> concern and the perspective these two groups take as very different.
>
> I've not notice this in four+ years.  Could you give some examples?
>
> BTW have people read the transcripts of Fadi's meeting with CSG in  
> LA?  He apparently has an activity in the works that you'd have  
> thought CS might have been consulted on?maybe ALAC has?
>
> from p. 27
>
>
> we will be doing a series of events around the planet called Multi- 
> stakeholder Internet Governance - we're dubbing them MIG Works.  
> Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance Works. The first MIG Works  
> will be in the Arab region and the second one will be in Africa  
> (this Dubai).
>
> We're doing both of these in March by the way, doing these not as  
> ICANN but with the rest of our fellow organizations ,so ISOC is  
> involved, the RRI's are involved - all of these organizations are  
> involved with us in this effort. This is not an effort to talk to  
> governments, this is an effort to talk to the multi- stakeholders  
> in this region and to tell them two things. That multi-  
> stakeholders works and that's how it works and secondly to engage  
> them in participating in the multi-stakeholder (in Dubai).
>
>
> Anyone here approached by staff about participating in MIG Works  
> meetings?
>
> Could this be part of what Miss Cade had in mind in saying that CS  
> knows nuttin about Internet governance?to discourage our inclusion  
> in such?  I wasn't in the room when she said it, to my regret?
>
> BD
>
>
>>
>> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
>>
>>> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to  
>>> see CS as one animal with different wings.We have common  
>>> interests and share values but there are certainly specifics. To  
>>> organoze too much rivalry between different wings of CS is not  
>>> helpful althougn some competition and  diversity is not bad.
>>>
>>> wolfgang
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
>>> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
>>> An: Avri Doria
>>> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>>> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to  
>>> see the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do  
>>> think a CS roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like  
>>> that one could imagine a serious collective effort to do a  
>>> mapping exercise, long overdue....
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>>>>
>>>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>>>>
>>>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially  
>>>> helpful would be ideas on:
>>>>
>>>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
>>>>> intersect.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> avri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
>>>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
>>>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
>>>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that  
>>>>>> you plan,
>>>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO  
>>>>>> Executive
>>>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent  
>>>>>> Internet
>>>>>> governance academics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best of luck,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> avri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
>>>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
>>>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
>>>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
>>>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Avri,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks  
>>>>> your idea
>>>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan  
>>>>> underway.  The
>>>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him  
>>>>> to encourage
>>>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which  
>>>>> they find
>>>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage  
>>>>> them to work
>>>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties  
>>>>> unfamiliar
>>>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that  
>>>>> new gTLDS
>>>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on  
>>>>> reputational
>>>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society  
>>>>> Organizations
>>>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your  
>>>>> help to create
>>>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS  
>>>>> developments
>>>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable  
>>>>> discussions aren't
>>>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger  
>>>>> picture
>>>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable  
>>>>> interoperable
>>>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where  
>>>>> there is an
>>>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We  
>>>>> need to
>>>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy  
>>>>> forums.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to  
>>>>> hear your
>>>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please  
>>>>> let me know
>>>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I  
>>>>> am cc-in my
>>>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
>>>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide  
>>>>> insights as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Christopher Mondini
>>>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
>>>>>
>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
>>>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>>>>>
>>>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
>>>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
>>>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>>>>>
>>>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/409ffd8a/attachment-0001.html>


From maria.farrell  Sun Feb 10 22:15:26 2013
From: maria.farrell (Maria Farrell)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:15:26 +0000
Subject: [PC-NCSG] volunteers for 2 proxies for GNSO Council this week?
In-Reply-To: <8E54FC5C-2B10-4C5A-8951-0026EAA10C98@ipjustice.org>
References: <8E54FC5C-2B10-4C5A-8951-0026EAA10C98@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <77F0C932-4F76-4470-823F-F8E038C13300@gmail.com>

Hi robin, I'm happy to take one of them. Pls put me down for magaly's as I think she asked first.

All the best, Maria 

Sent from my iPhone

On 9 Feb 2013, at 22:01, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Dear NCSG GNSO Councilors:
> 
> We need two proxies for this week's GNSO Council meeting (Wolfgang & Magaly can't participate in Thursday's GNSO Council mtg).
> 
> Any volunteers from our remaining Councilors to will serve as the proxy for Wolfang & Magaly?   We need 2 different people since a Councilor can only hold one proxy at a time.
> 
> Please let me know before Tuesday when I fly to Vienna and will be offline for a day at least.
> 
> Thanks!
> Robin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/f92d830e/attachment.html>


From robin  Mon Feb 11 00:21:23 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 14:21:23 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] volunteers for 2 proxies for GNSO Council this week?
In-Reply-To: <77F0C932-4F76-4470-823F-F8E038C13300@gmail.com>
References: <8E54FC5C-2B10-4C5A-8951-0026EAA10C98@ipjustice.org>
	<77F0C932-4F76-4470-823F-F8E038C13300@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4BBF0F39-9866-4F73-B9A6-BB19A74F7142@ipjustice.org>

Great, thank you, Maria!

I've submitted the proxy form to the GNSO Secretariat so Maria will  
hold Magaly's proxy for Thursday's Mtg.

Who will volunteer to hold Wolfgang's proxy on Thursday's Council call?

Thank you,
Robin

On Feb 10, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Maria Farrell wrote:

> Hi robin, I'm happy to take one of them. Pls put me down for  
> magaly's as I think she asked first.
>
> All the best, Maria
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 9 Feb 2013, at 22:01, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear NCSG GNSO Councilors:
>>
>> We need two proxies for this week's GNSO Council meeting (Wolfgang  
>> & Magaly can't participate in Thursday's GNSO Council mtg).
>>
>> Any volunteers from our remaining Councilors to will serve as the  
>> proxy for Wolfang & Magaly?   We need 2 different people since a  
>> Councilor can only hold one proxy at a time.
>>
>> Please let me know before Tuesday when I fly to Vienna and will be  
>> offline for a day at least.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/f43bf4af/attachment.html>


From robin  Mon Feb 11 02:05:02 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 16:05:02 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Input Statement on the Protection of IGO and INGO
	Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)
References: <C4B5E5D7461AB54B875986D2919CBB5FD2110BC23A@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
Message-ID: <AA357457-0F82-4AAD-BF3B-39FA94C64F8B@ipjustice.org>

Dear Glen & Thomas,

Please see the attached Input statement from NCSG for contribution to  
the working group.  Thank you for the opportunity to provide input  
into this policy issue.

Best,
Robin

?


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org>
> Date: January 16, 2013 7:21:17 AM PST
> To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> Cc: Brian Peck <brian.peck at icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail  
> <mail at berrycobb.com>, "gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>
> Subject: Reminder: Input requested for PDP on the Protection of IGO  
> and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)
>
> Reminder !
> The GNSO Council is looking to expedite this PDP to accommodate  
> requests from the ICANN Board and GAC.  As part of its efforts to  
> obtain input from the broader ICANN Community, at an early stage of  
> its deliberations, the IGO-INGO Protections Working Group tasked  
> with addressing this issue is looking for any input or information  
> that may help inform its deliberations. You are strongly encouraged  
> to provide any input your respective communities may have by  
> providing it to the GNSO Secretariat  
> (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org) by 15 January 2013.
>
>
>
> Please inform us whether you will be sending a statement and when  
> it can be expected.
>
>
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Glen
>
>
>
> Glen de Saint G?ry
>
> GNSO Secretariat
>
> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
>
> http://gnso.icann.org
>
>
>
> De : owner-gnso-secs at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-secs at icann.org]  
> De la part de Glen de Saint G?ry
> Envoy? : vendredi 7 d?cembre 2012 21:32
> ? : Robin Gross
> Cc : Brian Peck; Berry Cobb Mail; gnso-secs at icann.org
> Objet : [gnso-secs] Input requested for PDP on the Protection of  
> IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO)
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Robin,
>
> The PDP Working Group on the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers  
> in all gTLDs (IGO-INGO) would appreciate the NCSG?s input through  
> the attached  Input Template also in text below:
> Thank you.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Glen
>
>
>
> Stakeholder Group / Constituency / Input Template
>
> Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs Working Group
>
>
>
> PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR RESPONSE AT THE LATEST BY 15 January 2013 TO THE  
> GNSO SECRETARIAT (gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org), which will  
> forward your statement to the Working Group.
>
>
>
> The GNSO Council has formed a Working Group of interested  
> stakeholders and Stakeholder Group / Constituency representatives,  
> to collaborate broadly with knowledgeable individuals and  
> organizations, in order to consider recommendations in relation to  
> the protection of names, designations and acronyms, hereinafter  
> referred to as ?identifiers?, of intergovernmental organizations  
> (IGO?s) and international non-governmental organizations  
> (INGO?s) receiving protections under treaties and statutes under  
> multiple jurisdictions.
>
>
>
> Part of the Working Group?s effort will be to incorporate ideas  
> and suggestions gathered from Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies  
> through this template Statement.  Inserting your response in this  
> form will make it much easier for the Working Group to summarize  
> the responses for analysis. This information is helpful to the  
> community in understanding the points of view of various  
> stakeholders. However, you should feel free to add any information  
> you deem important to inform the Working Group?s deliberations,  
> even if this does not fit into any of the questions listed below.
>
>
>
> For further information, please visit the WG Webpage and Workspace:
>
> http://community.icann.org/display/GWGTCT/
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/protection-igo-names.htm
>
>
> Process
>
> -        Please identify the member(s) of your Stakeholder Group /  
> Constituency who is (are) participating in this Working Group
>
> -        Please identify the members of your Stakeholder Group /  
> Constituency who participated in developing the perspective(s) set  
> forth below
>
> -        Please describe the process by which your Stakeholder  
> Group / Constituency arrived at the perspective(s) set forth below
>
>
>
> Below are elements of the approved charter that the WG has been  
> tasked to address:
>
> As part of its deliberations on the first issue as to whether there  
> is a need for special protections for IGO and INGO organizations at  
> the top and second level in all gTLDs (existing and new), the PDP  
> WG should, at a minimum, consider the following elements as  
> detailed in the Final Issue Report:
>
>
>
> ?        Quantifying the Entities whose names  may be Considered  
> for Special Protection
>
> ?        Evaluating the Scope of Existing Protections under  
> International Treaties/Laws for the IGO-INGO organizations concerned;
>
> ?        Establishing Qualification Criteria for Special Protection  
> of  names of the IGO and INGO organizations concerned;
>
> ?        Distinguishing any Substantive Differences between the  
> RCRC and IOC designations from those of other IGO-INGO Organizations.
>
>
>
> Should the PDP WG reach consensus on a recommendation that there is  
> a need for special protections at the top and second levels in all  
> existing and new gTLDs for IGO and INGO organization identifiers,  
> the PDP WG is expected to:
>
>
>
> ?        Develop specific recommendations for appropriate special  
> protections, if any, for the identifiers of any or all IGO and INGO  
> organizations at the first and second levels.
>
> ?        Determine the appropriate protections, if any, for RCRC  
> and IOC names at the second level for the initial round of new  
> gTLDs and make recommendations on the implementation of such  
> protection.
>
> ?        Determine whether the current special protections being  
> provided to RCRC and IOC names at the top and second level of the  
> initial round of new gTLDs should be made permanent for RCRC and  
> IOC names in all gTLDs; if so, determine whether the existing  
> protections are sufficient and comprehensive; if not, develop  
> specific recommendations for appropriate special protections (if  
> any) for these identifiers.
>
>
>
> Questions to Consider:
>
>
>
> 1.      What kinds of entities should be considered for Special  
> Protections at the top and second level in all gTLDs (existing and  
> new)?
>
> Group View:
>
> 2.      What facts or law are you aware of which might form an  
> objective basis for Special Protections under International  
> Treaties/Domestic Laws for IGOs, INGOs as they may relate to gTLDs  
> and the DNS?
>
> Group View:
>
> 3.      Do you have opinions about what criteria should be used for  
> Special Protection of the IGO and INGO identifiers?
>
> Group View:
>
> 4.      Do you think there are substantive differences between the  
> RCRC/IOC and IGOs and INGOs?
>
> Group View:
>
> 5.      Should appropriate Special Protections at the top and  
> second level for the identifiers of IGOs and INGOs be made?
>
> Group View:
>
> 6.      In addition, should Special Protections for the identifiers  
> of IGOs and INGOs at the second level be in place for the initial  
> round of new gTLDs?
>
> Group View:
>
> 7.      Should the current Special Protections provided to the RCRC  
> and IOC names at the top and second level of the initial round for  
> new gTLDs be made permanent in all gTLDs and if not, what specific  
> recommendations for appropriate Special Protections (if any) do you  
> have?
>
> Group View:
>
> 8.      Do you feel existing RPMs or proposed RPMs for the new gTLD  
> program are adequate to offer protections to IGO and INGOs  
> (understanding that UDRP and TMCH may not be eligible for all IGOs  
> and INGOs)?
>
> Group View:
>
>
> For further background information on the WG?s activities to date,  
> please see:
>
>
>
> ?        Protections of IGO and INGO identifiers in all gTLDs web  
> page (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/protection-igo- 
> names.htm).
>
> ?        Protection of International Organization Names Final Issue  
> Report, for insight into the current practices and issues  
> experienced (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo- 
> names-final-issue-report-01oct12-en.pdf).
>
> ?        The IOC/RCRC DT page is also a good reference for how  
> those efforts were combined with this PDP (see http:// 
> gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/red-cross-ioc.htm).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Glen de Saint G?ry
>
> GNSO Secretariat
>
> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
>
> http://gnso.icann.org
>
>
>
?



IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/628b267e/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NCSG_IGO-INGO_Input_Request_FINAL.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 89167 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/628b267e/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/628b267e/attachment-0004.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IGO-INGO_Input_Request_SG-C_v1.0.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 58368 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/628b267e/attachment-0001.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/628b267e/attachment-0005.html>


From magaly.pazello  Mon Feb 11 02:26:34 2013
From: magaly.pazello (Magaly Pazello)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:26:34 -0200
Subject: [PC-NCSG] volunteers for 2 proxies for GNSO Council this week?
In-Reply-To: <4BBF0F39-9866-4F73-B9A6-BB19A74F7142@ipjustice.org>
References: <8E54FC5C-2B10-4C5A-8951-0026EAA10C98@ipjustice.org>
	<77F0C932-4F76-4470-823F-F8E038C13300@gmail.com>
	<4BBF0F39-9866-4F73-B9A6-BB19A74F7142@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <CA+dOKfDN0jpJY=Qu2sYLfsYduV=-DZA2Ko8qbgqJGvuOsw3Ugw@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you very much Robin and Maria!
Hope we get an other volunteer :-)
best,
Magaly

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> Great, thank you, Maria!
>
> I've submitted the proxy form to the GNSO Secretariat so Maria will hold
> Magaly's proxy for Thursday's Mtg.
>
> Who will volunteer to hold Wolfgang's proxy on Thursday's Council call?
>
> Thank you,
> Robin
>
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 12:15 PM, Maria Farrell wrote:
>
> Hi robin, I'm happy to take one of them. Pls put me down for magaly's as I
> think she asked first.
>
> All the best, Maria
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 9 Feb 2013, at 22:01, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>
> Dear NCSG GNSO Councilors:
>
> We need two proxies for this week's GNSO Council meeting (Wolfgang & Magaly
> can't participate in Thursday's GNSO Council mtg).
>
> Any volunteers from our remaining Councilors to will serve as the proxy for
> Wolfang & Magaly?   We need 2 different people since a Councilor can only
> hold one proxy at a time.
>
> Please let me know before Tuesday when I fly to Vienna and will be offline
> for a day at least.
>
> Thanks!
> Robin
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>



From robin  Mon Feb 11 06:32:20 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:32:20 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
References: <BDBCC21442A22640A4ECE2C75A8E215A947E9D2FA8@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
Message-ID: <FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>

FYI

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
> Date: February 9, 2013 10:28:15 PM PST
> To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com>
> Cc: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>, Kristina Rosette <krosette at cov.com>, "Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)" <wendy at seltzer.com>, Wolfgang Kleinw?chter <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
> 

> And I confirm I am happy to facilitate such discussions
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:07 AM
> To: Metalitz, Steven
> Cc: Chris LaHatte; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you Steve.  Yes, we can agree to this process to move us forward with the issue of a Vice Chair for our house.  The only additional request is that we'd like for the ombudsman to participate in the negotiations to set the procedures for 2014 (point 3 below).
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks again,
> 
> Robin
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Metalitz, Steven wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Chris,
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you again for facilitating our brief but productive meeting last week in Los Angeles. 
> 
>  
> 
> I can now confirm that the CSG can support the following approach which emerged from the meeting:
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 1.       Wolf-Ulrich Knoben  will continue as vice chair until the 2013 annual meeting (Buenos Aires).  There will be no election.
> 
> 2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes to be selected.
> 
> 3.       We will meet as a house no later than the London  (mid-2014) meeting to set the procedures that would apply for the term following the 2014 annual meeting (and perhaps beyond).
> 
>  
> 
> (When we met in LA I was under the impression that the second meeting of CY 2014 was in Singapore.  It seems ? though the ICANN announcement is not explicit ? that it will be in London.  In any case, the reference in point 3 is to the second meeting of CY 2014 as the outside date for this discussion.)
> 
>  
> 
> If the NCSG representatives can confirm their SG?s approval of this approach,  then I believe we can put this matter behind us.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks again to all for your respective roles in reaching this conclusion.
> 
>  
> 
> Steve Metalitz
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>     
> 
>  
> 
>     
> 
>  
> 
> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:26 PM
> To: Metalitz, Steven
> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> I am on my way
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:23 PM
> To: Chris LaHatte
> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> Mockapetris room is available. Shall we convene there?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:14 PM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> I am in room 412 which is a bit small-depending on who can make it here-It could fit about 6-7 at the most
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:48 AM
> To: Chris LaHatte
> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> So about 1:30?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:41 AM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> I can meet at lunch-we will need to find somewhere, but I am sure we can
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:38 AM
> To: Chris LaHatte
> Cc: Steven Metalitz; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks, Chris and Steve.  How about a chat after the CEO speaks during lunch?
> 
>  
> 
> Robin
> 
>  
> 
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Chris LaHatte wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for this. I have seen at least some of the exchanges. I am available except for a meeting at 3 today for about an hour, and tomorrow at 10, and at 1 to 3.45  tomorrow for a meeting with the board. I can meet early morning late evening-whenever suits.
> 
>  
> 
> Can I encapsulate the issue as to
> 
>  
> 
> 1.      Was the agreement to rotate the nomination a long term agreement or one off only?
> 
> 2.      Is there any reason why, if it was one off only, why you could not agree to let the nomination proceed?
> 
> By use of the term ?you? I mean both constituencies.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:07 AM
> To: Chris LaHatte; Robin Gross
> Cc: Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> Chris,
> 
>  
> 
> CSG remains glad to speak with you and with NCSG and welcomes your efforts to resolve this.  Perhaps we could find a few minutes  this afternoon (I note the slot from 1:30 to 3 includes the possibility of break out sessions. 
> 
>  
> 
> We disagree with the characterizations below on factual grounds.  As you already have the documentation on what the agreement and where things now stand, I won?t repeat it here.  Glad to focus on solutions going forward. 
> 
>  
> 
> Steve Metalitz, IPC  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:26 PM
> To: Robin Gross
> Cc: Avri Doria; Metalitz, Steven; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> I am available to talk and perhaps discuss matters separately or together. I just bumped into Marilyn Cade who does want to talk, so perhaps something can be done
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:21 PM
> To: Chris LaHatte
> Cc: Avri Doria; Steven Metalitz; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
> 
>  
> 
> Dear Chris,
> 
>  
> 
> I would definitely like to resolve this situation this week in LA while we are here.  However, we thought we had come to an agreement to rotate turns nominating VC candidates, and if the CSG is not willing to honor that agreement we wonder how useful it would be to try to reach a "new" agreement with them.  Since their VC continues on indefinitely, as long as they don't agree to do anything else, there is no incentive for CSG to make or to honor agreements.  Given CSG's refusal to rotate turns means their candidate remains VC indefinitely, why would CSG agree to do anything?
> 
>  
> 
> Hope you have some useful suggestions for how we can resolve this impasse.  Or does NCSG need to file a "complaint" with the ombudsman to get CSG's attention?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Robin
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> To be honest, I do not see any way beyond this impasse.  NCSG believes we had an agreement that was unilaterally abrogated by CSG.  CSG seems to beleive there was no agreement.
> 
>  
> 
> I see no point on coming to any further agreements without some expectation that the agreement would be honored.
> 
>  
> 
> I suggest we just tell the g-council chair that the NCPH, such as it is, is unable to come to agreement on how to elect a vice chair and go without one.  It is obvious that the leadership of the g-counci is permanently in CPH hands, so we might as well sit back, relax and quit trying to find agreement in a circumstance where agreement is illogical.
> 
>  
> 
> Chris, thanks for your willingness to moderate this issue, but I do not see the point of trying.
> 
>  
> 
> avri
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On 28 Jan 2013, at 13:48, Chris LaHatte wrote:
> 
>  
> 
> Dear people
> 
> I thought I should mention that I am in the Los Angeles office and available if needed on this issue. I leave on Saturday 2nd February at 10 pm so subject to my meetings schedule, I am able to meet if you want to
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
> Chris LaHatte
> 
> Ombudsman
> 
> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
> 
> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
> 
> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Confidentiality
> 
> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> 
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> 
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> 
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> 
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> 
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> 
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> 
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> 
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> 
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130210/d5baa3cd/attachment-0001.html>


From wendy  Tue Feb 12 00:46:43 2013
From: wendy (Wendy Seltzer)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:46:43 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
 Committee
In-Reply-To: <97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
Message-ID: <511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>

On 02/08/2013 04:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
> On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
> 
>> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion of an Alternate Chair is a great one.
>>
>> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)

Supported by an alternate chair, I'm willing to accept the nomination.

--Wendy

>>
>> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)
> 
> thanks.
> 
> but sure 
> if we have an alternate chair,
> i am willing to stand for alternate chair.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/



From Mary.Wong  Tue Feb 12 00:57:57 2013
From: Mary.Wong (Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:57:57 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
In-Reply-To: <FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>
References: <BDBCC21442A22640A4ECE2C75A8E215A947E9D2FA8@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
	<FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <511931250200005B000A1A90@smtp.law.unh.edu>


Thanks, Robin - and thanks for shepherding this whole thing through
this long-drawn out process. Just one question - does Steve M's email
stating that NCSG will have the "privilege" of putting up a candidate
next year mean that there is NO agreement on rotation, i.e. that CSG may
well also put up its own candidate, in which case there'll be a
contested election and the winner will need 8 votes? 

Cheers 
Mary


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
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:  
Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> 

To: 
NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

Date:  
2/10/2013 11:31 PM 

Subject:  
[PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support 

FYI

Begin forwarded message:




From: Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
Date: February 9, 2013 10:28:15 PM PST
To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Metalitz, Steven"
<met at msk.com>
Cc: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>, Tony Holmes
<tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>,
Kristina Rosette <krosette at cov.com>, "Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)"
<wendy at seltzer.com>, Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support

 




And I confirm I am happy to facilitate such discussions 
Regards 
  

Chris LaHatte 
Ombudsman 
Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 
Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 
Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 
  
  
Confidentiality 
All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:07 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven
Cc: Chris LaHatte; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support 

  
Thank you Steve.  Yes, we can agree to this process to move us forward
with the issue of a Vice Chair for our house.  The only additional
request is that we'd like for the ombudsman to participate in the
negotiations to set the procedures for 2014 (point 3 below). 

  

Thanks again, 

Robin 

  

  

On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Metalitz, Steven wrote: 




Dear Chris, 

  

Thank you again for facilitating our brief but productive meeting last
week in Los Angeles.  

  

I can now confirm that the CSG can support the following approach which
emerged from the meeting: 

  

  

1.       Wolf-Ulrich Knoben  will continue as vice chair until the 2013
annual meeting (Buenos Aires).  There will be no election. 

2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for
the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes
to be selected. 

3.       We will meet as a house no later than the London  (mid-2014)
meeting to set the procedures that would apply for the term following
the 2014 annual meeting (and perhaps beyond). 

  

(When we met in LA I was under the impression that the second meeting
of CY 2014 was in Singapore.  It seems ? though the ICANN announcement
is not explicit ? that it will be in London.  In any case, the reference
in point 3 is to the second meeting of CY 2014 as the outside date for
this discussion.) 

  

If the NCSG representatives can confirm their SG?s approval of this
approach,  then I believe we can put this matter behind us. 

  

Thanks again to all for your respective roles in reaching this
conclusion. 

  

Steve Metalitz 

  

  

     

  

     

  

From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:26 PM
To: Metalitz, Steven
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

I am on my way 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:23 PM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Mockapetris room is available. Shall we convene there?

Sent from my iPhone 


On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:14 PM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
wrote: 



I am in room 412 which is a bit small-depending on who can make it
here-It could fit about 6-7 at the most 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:48 AM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

So about 1:30?

Sent from my iPhone 


On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:41 AM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
wrote: 



I can meet at lunch-we will need to find somewhere, but I am sure we
can 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:38 AM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Steven Metalitz; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Thanks, Chris and Steve.  How about a chat after the CEO speaks during
lunch? 

  

Robin 

  

On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Chris LaHatte wrote: 





 

Thanks for this. I have seen at least some of the exchanges. I am
available except for a meeting at 3 today for about an hour, and
tomorrow at 10, and at 1 to 3.45  tomorrow for a meeting with the board.
I can meet early morning late evening-whenever suits. 

  

Can I encapsulate the issue as to 

  

1.      Was the agreement to rotate the nomination a long term
agreement or one off only? 

2.      Is there any reason why, if it was one off only, why you could
not agree to let the nomination proceed? 

By use of the term ?you? I mean both constituencies. 

  

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:07 AM
To: Chris LaHatte; Robin Gross
Cc: Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy
Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

Chris, 

  

CSG remains glad to speak with you and with NCSG and welcomes your
efforts to resolve this.  Perhaps we could find a few minutes  this
afternoon (I note the slot from 1:30 to 3 includes the possibility of
break out sessions.  

  

We disagree with the characterizations below on factual grounds.  As
you already have the documentation on what the agreement and where
things now stand, I won?t repeat it here.  Glad to focus on solutions
going forward.  

  

Steve Metalitz, IPC   

  

From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:26 PM
To: Robin Gross
Cc: Avri Doria; Metalitz, Steven; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

I am available to talk and perhaps discuss matters separately or
together. I just bumped into Marilyn Cade who does want to talk, so
perhaps something can be done 

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:21 PM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Avri Doria; Steven Metalitz; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Dear Chris, 

  

I would definitely like to resolve this situation this week in LA while
we are here.  However, we thought we had come to an agreement to rotate
turns nominating VC candidates, and if the CSG is not willing to honor
that agreement we wonder how useful it would be to try to reach a "new"
agreement with them.  Since their VC continues on indefinitely, as long
as they don't agree to do anything else, there is no incentive for CSG
to make or to honor agreements.  Given CSG's refusal to rotate turns
means their candidate remains VC indefinitely, why would CSG agree to do
anything? 

  

Hope you have some useful suggestions for how we can resolve this
impasse.  Or does NCSG need to file a "complaint" with the ombudsman to
get CSG's attention? 

  

Thanks, 

Robin 

  

  

  

On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: 

  

Hi, 

  

To be honest, I do not see any way beyond this impasse.  NCSG believes
we had an agreement that was unilaterally abrogated by CSG.  CSG seems
to beleive there was no agreement. 

  

I see no point on coming to any further agreements without some
expectation that the agreement would be honored. 

  

I suggest we just tell the g-council chair that the NCPH, such as it
is, is unable to come to agreement on how to elect a vice chair and go
without one.  It is obvious that the leadership of the g-counci is
permanently in CPH hands, so we might as well sit back, relax and quit
trying to find agreement in a circumstance where agreement is illogical.


  

Chris, thanks for your willingness to moderate this issue, but I do not
see the point of trying. 

  

avri 

  

  

On 28 Jan 2013, at 13:48, Chris LaHatte wrote: 

  



Dear people 

I thought I should mention that I am in the Los Angeles office and
available if needed on this issue. I leave on Saturday 2nd February at
10 pm so subject to my meetings schedule, I am able to meet if you want
to 

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 
 

  

  

  

  

  

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 

  

  

  

  

  

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 





  

  
 
 

  

   

   

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 



 

  
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/9be4214b/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Tue Feb 12 01:06:36 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:06:36 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
In-Reply-To: <511931250200005B000A1A90@smtp.law.unh.edu>
References: <BDBCC21442A22640A4ECE2C75A8E215A947E9D2FA8@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
	<FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>
	<511931250200005B000A1A90@smtp.law.unh.edu>
Message-ID: <364C348A-8F80-4BB1-B6EE-745AEFC4361A@ipjustice.org>

I see your concern, Mary.  Thanks.  Steve's a slippery one.  What if  
we re-worded point 2 as follows?:

"2.  NCSG is entitled to put forward the initial sole candidate for  
the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8  
votes to be selected."

It is currently:
"2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for  
the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8  
votes to be selected."

Would that fix the possible difference in interpretation?

Thanks again,
Robin


On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:57 PM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

> Thanks, Robin - and thanks for shepherding this whole thing through  
> this long-drawn out process. Just one question - does Steve M's  
> email stating that NCSG will have the "privilege" of putting up a  
> candidate next year mean that there is NO agreement on rotation,  
> i.e. that CSG may well also put up its own candidate, in which case  
> there'll be a contested election and the winner will need 8 votes?
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
> 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:
> Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> To:
> NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> Date:
> 2/10/2013 11:31 PM
> Subject:
> [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
> FYI
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
>> Date: February 9, 2013 10:28:15 PM PST
>> To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Metalitz, Steven"  
>> <met at msk.com>
>> Cc: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>, Tony Holmes  
>> <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Marilyn Cade  
>> <marilynscade at hotmail.com>, Kristina Rosette <krosette at cov.com>,  
>> "Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)" <wendy at seltzer.com>, Wolfgang  
>> Kleinw?chter <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
>>
>
>> And I confirm I am happy to facilitate such discussions
>> Regards
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
>> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:07 AM
>> To: Metalitz, Steven
>> Cc: Chris LaHatte; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina  
>> Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
>>
>> Thank you Steve.  Yes, we can agree to this process to move us  
>> forward with the issue of a Vice Chair for our house.  The only  
>> additional request is that we'd like for the ombudsman to  
>> participate in the negotiations to set the procedures for 2014  
>> (point 3 below).
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Metalitz, Steven wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Chris,
>>
>> Thank you again for facilitating our brief but productive meeting  
>> last week in Los Angeles.
>>
>> I can now confirm that the CSG can support the following approach  
>> which emerged from the meeting:
>>
>>
>> 1.       Wolf-Ulrich Knoben  will continue as vice chair until the  
>> 2013 annual meeting (Buenos Aires).  There will be no election.
>> 2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate  
>> for the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get  
>> 8 votes to be selected.
>> 3.       We will meet as a house no later than the London   
>> (mid-2014) meeting to set the procedures that would apply for the  
>> term following the 2014 annual meeting (and perhaps beyond).
>>
>> (When we met in LA I was under the impression that the second  
>> meeting of CY 2014 was in Singapore.  It seems ? though the ICANN  
>> announcement is not explicit ? that it will be in London.  In any  
>> case, the reference in point 3 is to the second meeting of CY 2014  
>> as the outside date for this discussion.)
>>
>> If the NCSG representatives can confirm their SG?s approval of  
>> this approach,  then I believe we can put this matter behind us.
>>
>> Thanks again to all for your respective roles in reaching this  
>> conclusion.
>>
>> Steve Metalitz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:26 PM
>> To: Metalitz, Steven
>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina  
>> Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> I am on my way
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:23 PM
>> To: Chris LaHatte
>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina  
>> Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> Mockapetris room is available. Shall we convene there?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:14 PM, "Chris LaHatte"  
>> <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
>> I am in room 412 which is a bit small-depending on who can make it  
>> here-It could fit about 6-7 at the most
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:48 AM
>> To: Chris LaHatte
>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina  
>> Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> So about 1:30?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:41 AM, "Chris LaHatte"  
>> <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
>> I can meet at lunch-we will need to find somewhere, but I am sure  
>> we can
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:38 AM
>> To: Chris LaHatte
>> Cc: Steven Metalitz; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade;  
>> Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang  
>> Kleinw?chter
>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> Thanks, Chris and Steve.  How about a chat after the CEO speaks  
>> during lunch?
>>
>> Robin
>>
>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Chris LaHatte wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for this. I have seen at least some of the exchanges. I am  
>> available except for a meeting at 3 today for about an hour, and  
>> tomorrow at 10, and at 1 to 3.45  tomorrow for a meeting with the  
>> board. I can meet early morning late evening-whenever suits.
>>
>> Can I encapsulate the issue as to
>>
>> 1.      Was the agreement to rotate the nomination a long term  
>> agreement or one off only?
>> 2.      Is there any reason why, if it was one off only, why you  
>> could not agree to let the nomination proceed?
>> By use of the term ?you? I mean both constituencies.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:07 AM
>> To: Chris LaHatte; Robin Gross
>> Cc: Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy  
>> Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> Chris,
>>
>> CSG remains glad to speak with you and with NCSG and welcomes your  
>> efforts to resolve this.  Perhaps we could find a few minutes   
>> this afternoon (I note the slot from 1:30 to 3 includes the  
>> possibility of break out sessions.
>>
>> We disagree with the characterizations below on factual grounds.   
>> As you already have the documentation on what the agreement and  
>> where things now stand, I won?t repeat it here.  Glad to focus on  
>> solutions going forward.
>>
>> Steve Metalitz, IPC
>>
>> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org]
>> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:26 PM
>> To: Robin Gross
>> Cc: Avri Doria; Metalitz, Steven; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade;  
>> Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> I am available to talk and perhaps discuss matters separately or  
>> together. I just bumped into Marilyn Cade who does want to talk,  
>> so perhaps something can be done
>> Regards
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
>> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:21 PM
>> To: Chris LaHatte
>> Cc: Avri Doria; Steven Metalitz; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade;  
>> Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>
>> Dear Chris,
>>
>> I would definitely like to resolve this situation this week in LA  
>> while we are here.  However, we thought we had come to an  
>> agreement to rotate turns nominating VC candidates, and if the CSG  
>> is not willing to honor that agreement we wonder how useful it  
>> would be to try to reach a "new" agreement with them.  Since their  
>> VC continues on indefinitely, as long as they don't agree to do  
>> anything else, there is no incentive for CSG to make or to honor  
>> agreements.  Given CSG's refusal to rotate turns means their  
>> candidate remains VC indefinitely, why would CSG agree to do  
>> anything?
>>
>> Hope you have some useful suggestions for how we can resolve this  
>> impasse.  Or does NCSG need to file a "complaint" with the  
>> ombudsman to get CSG's attention?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> To be honest, I do not see any way beyond this impasse.  NCSG  
>> believes we had an agreement that was unilaterally abrogated by  
>> CSG.  CSG seems to beleive there was no agreement.
>>
>> I see no point on coming to any further agreements without some  
>> expectation that the agreement would be honored.
>>
>> I suggest we just tell the g-council chair that the NCPH, such as  
>> it is, is unable to come to agreement on how to elect a vice chair  
>> and go without one.  It is obvious that the leadership of the g- 
>> counci is permanently in CPH hands, so we might as well sit back,  
>> relax and quit trying to find agreement in a circumstance where  
>> agreement is illogical.
>>
>> Chris, thanks for your willingness to moderate this issue, but I  
>> do not see the point of trying.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 28 Jan 2013, at 13:48, Chris LaHatte wrote:
>>
>> Dear people
>> I thought I should mention that I am in the Los Angeles office and  
>> available if needed on this issue. I leave on Saturday 2nd  
>> February at 10 pm so subject to my meetings schedule, I am able to  
>> meet if you want to
>> Regards
>>
>> Chris LaHatte
>> Ombudsman
>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>
>>
>> Confidentiality
>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as  
>> confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps  
>> necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those  
>> parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the  
>> Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise  
>> staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a  
>> complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.   
>> The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure  
>> that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence  
>> and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the  
>> confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to  
>> further the resolution of a complaint
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/b783d616/attachment-0001.html>


From Mary.Wong  Tue Feb 12 01:14:38 2013
From: Mary.Wong (Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:14:38 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
In-Reply-To: <364C348A-8F80-4BB1-B6EE-745AEFC4361A@ipjustice.org>
References: <BDBCC21442A22640A4ECE2C75A8E215A947E9D2FA8@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
	<FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>
	<511931250200005B000A1A90@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<364C348A-8F80-4BB1-B6EE-745AEFC4361A@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <5119350E0200005B000A1AB7@smtp.law.unh.edu>


Yeah, I was just worried that CSG would get all technical and semantic
with us when the time comes next year, since he used the word
"privilege" and not "right", and made no mention of any other potential
candidate. I think rewording it to make it clear that this is not the
understanding - especially if your email indicates what the
understanding seems to be instead - would be a good thing. That way, if
they disagree with the interpretation, may as well have that out now in
front of Chris LaHatte rather than wait a year for the inevitable .... 

Cheers 
Mary


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
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:  
Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> 

To: 
<Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> 

CC: 
"NCSG-Policy" <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

Date:  
2/11/2013 6:06 PM 

Subject:  
Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support 

I see your concern, Mary.  Thanks.  Steve's a slippery one.  What if we
re-worded point 2 as follows?: 



"2.  NCSG is entitled to put forward the initial sole candidate for the
following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes to be
selected." 



It is currently:   

"2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for
the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes
to be selected." 



Would that fix the possible difference in interpretation? 



Thanks again, 

Robin 





On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:57 PM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote: 





Thanks, Robin - and thanks for shepherding this whole thing through
this long-drawn out process. Just one question - does Steve M's email
stating that NCSG will have the "privilege" of putting up a candidate
next year mean that there is NO agreement on rotation, i.e. that CSG may
well also put up its own candidate, in which case there'll be a
contested election and the winner will need 8 votes? 



Cheers 

Mary


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
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:  

Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> 

To: 

NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

Date:  

2/10/2013 11:31 PM 

Subject:  

[PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support 

FYI

Begin forwarded message:




From: Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
Date: February 9, 2013 10:28:15 PM PST
To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Metalitz, Steven"
<met at msk.com>
Cc: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>, Tony Holmes
<tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>,
Kristina Rosette <krosette at cov.com>, "Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)"
<wendy at seltzer.com>, Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support

 





And I confirm I am happy to facilitate such discussions 

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:07 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven
Cc: Chris LaHatte; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support 

  

Thank you Steve.  Yes, we can agree to this process to move us forward
with the issue of a Vice Chair for our house.  The only additional
request is that we'd like for the ombudsman to participate in the
negotiations to set the procedures for 2014 (point 3 below). 

  

Thanks again, 

Robin 

  

  

On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Metalitz, Steven wrote: 




Dear Chris, 

  

Thank you again for facilitating our brief but productive meeting last
week in Los Angeles.  

  

I can now confirm that the CSG can support the following approach which
emerged from the meeting: 

  

  

1.       Wolf-Ulrich Knoben  will continue as vice chair until the 2013
annual meeting (Buenos Aires).  There will be no election. 

2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for
the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes
to be selected. 

3.       We will meet as a house no later than the London  (mid-2014)
meeting to set the procedures that would apply for the term following
the 2014 annual meeting (and perhaps beyond). 

  

(When we met in LA I was under the impression that the second meeting
of CY 2014 was in Singapore.  It seems ? though the ICANN announcement
is not explicit ? that it will be in London.  In any case, the reference
in point 3 is to the second meeting of CY 2014 as the outside date for
this discussion.) 

  

If the NCSG representatives can confirm their SG?s approval of this
approach,  then I believe we can put this matter behind us. 

  

Thanks again to all for your respective roles in reaching this
conclusion. 

  

Steve Metalitz 

  

  

     

  

     

  

From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:26 PM
To: Metalitz, Steven
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

I am on my way 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:23 PM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Mockapetris room is available. Shall we convene there?

Sent from my iPhone 


On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:14 PM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
wrote: 



I am in room 412 which is a bit small-depending on who can make it
here-It could fit about 6-7 at the most 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:48 AM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

So about 1:30?

Sent from my iPhone 


On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:41 AM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
wrote: 



I can meet at lunch-we will need to find somewhere, but I am sure we
can 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:38 AM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Steven Metalitz; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Thanks, Chris and Steve.  How about a chat after the CEO speaks during
lunch? 

  

Robin 

  

On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Chris LaHatte wrote: 





 

Thanks for this. I have seen at least some of the exchanges. I am
available except for a meeting at 3 today for about an hour, and
tomorrow at 10, and at 1 to 3.45  tomorrow for a meeting with the board.
I can meet early morning late evening-whenever suits. 

  

Can I encapsulate the issue as to 

  

1.      Was the agreement to rotate the nomination a long term
agreement or one off only? 

2.      Is there any reason why, if it was one off only, why you could
not agree to let the nomination proceed? 

By use of the term ?you? I mean both constituencies. 

  

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:07 AM
To: Chris LaHatte; Robin Gross
Cc: Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy
Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

Chris, 

  

CSG remains glad to speak with you and with NCSG and welcomes your
efforts to resolve this.  Perhaps we could find a few minutes  this
afternoon (I note the slot from 1:30 to 3 includes the possibility of
break out sessions.  

  

We disagree with the characterizations below on factual grounds.  As
you already have the documentation on what the agreement and where
things now stand, I won?t repeat it here.  Glad to focus on solutions
going forward.  

  

Steve Metalitz, IPC   

  

From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:26 PM
To: Robin Gross
Cc: Avri Doria; Metalitz, Steven; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position 

  

I am available to talk and perhaps discuss matters separately or
together. I just bumped into Marilyn Cade who does want to talk, so
perhaps something can be done 

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 

  

From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:21 PM
To: Chris LaHatte
Cc: Avri Doria; Steven Metalitz; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina
Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position 

  

Dear Chris, 

  

I would definitely like to resolve this situation this week in LA while
we are here.  However, we thought we had come to an agreement to rotate
turns nominating VC candidates, and if the CSG is not willing to honor
that agreement we wonder how useful it would be to try to reach a "new"
agreement with them.  Since their VC continues on indefinitely, as long
as they don't agree to do anything else, there is no incentive for CSG
to make or to honor agreements.  Given CSG's refusal to rotate turns
means their candidate remains VC indefinitely, why would CSG agree to do
anything? 

  

Hope you have some useful suggestions for how we can resolve this
impasse.  Or does NCSG need to file a "complaint" with the ombudsman to
get CSG's attention? 

  

Thanks, 

Robin 

  

  

  

On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote: 

  

Hi, 

  

To be honest, I do not see any way beyond this impasse.  NCSG believes
we had an agreement that was unilaterally abrogated by CSG.  CSG seems
to beleive there was no agreement. 

  

I see no point on coming to any further agreements without some
expectation that the agreement would be honored. 

  

I suggest we just tell the g-council chair that the NCPH, such as it
is, is unable to come to agreement on how to elect a vice chair and go
without one.  It is obvious that the leadership of the g-counci is
permanently in CPH hands, so we might as well sit back, relax and quit
trying to find agreement in a circumstance where agreement is illogical.


  

Chris, thanks for your willingness to moderate this issue, but I do not
see the point of trying. 

  

avri 

  

  

On 28 Jan 2013, at 13:48, Chris LaHatte wrote: 

  



Dear people 

I thought I should mention that I am in the Los Angeles office and
available if needed on this issue. I leave on Saturday 2nd February at
10 pm so subject to my meetings schedule, I am able to meet if you want
to 

Regards 

  

Chris LaHatte 

Ombudsman 

Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/ 

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman 

Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman 

  

  

Confidentiality 

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps
necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those
parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the
Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff
or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in
order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall
take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board
members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant,
they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information,
except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint 
 

  

  

  

  

  

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 

  

  

  

  

  

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 





  

  
 
 

  

   

   

IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 



 

  
 
 








IP JUSTICE 

Robin Gross, Executive Director 

1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA 

p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 

w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/4d572f9b/attachment-0001.html>


From avri  Tue Feb 12 03:29:54 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:29:54 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd:  Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
In-Reply-To: <364C348A-8F80-4BB1-B6EE-745AEFC4361A@ipjustice.org>
References: <BDBCC21442A22640A4ECE2C75A8E215A947E9D2FA8@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
	<FCEEAA6B-F757-4E22-9D35-AA85EAD23A2D@ipjustice.org>
	<511931250200005B000A1A90@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<364C348A-8F80-4BB1-B6EE-745AEFC4361A@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <40BCD358-8DDD-4EB8-A722-6588F1BCF820@acm.org>

Hi,

I think that with Chris' intervention, that will not happen.  It is certainly not the intent.
Don't get me wrong, I have not become a trusting soul, I just don't think he is being that sneaky.


avri



On 11 Feb 2013, at 18:06, Robin Gross wrote:

> I see your concern, Mary.  Thanks.  Steve's a slippery one.  What if we re-worded point 2 as follows?:
> 
> "2.  NCSG is entitled to put forward the initial sole candidate for the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes to be selected."
> 
> It is currently:  
> "2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes to be selected."
> 
> Would that fix the possible difference in interpretation?
> 
> Thanks again,
> Robin
> 
> 
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:57 PM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks, Robin - and thanks for shepherding this whole thing through this long-drawn out process. Just one question - does Steve M's email stating that NCSG will have the "privilege" of putting up a candidate next year mean that there is NO agreement on rotation, i.e. that CSG may well also put up its own candidate, in which case there'll be a contested election and the winner will need 8 votes?
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Mary
>> 
>> 
>> Mary W S Wong 
>> Professor of Law 
>> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP 
>> Chair, Graduate IP Programs 
>> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW 
>> Two White Street 
>> Concord, NH 03301 
>> USA 
>> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu 
>> 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:
>> Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
>> To:
>> NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>> Date:
>> 2/10/2013 11:31 PM
>> Subject:
>> [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support                  
>> FYI
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte at icann.org>
>>> Date: February 9, 2013 10:28:15 PM PST
>>> To: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>, "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com>
>>> Cc: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>, Kristina Rosette <krosette at cov.com>, "Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)" <wendy at seltzer.com>, Wolfgang Kleinw?chter <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
>>> 
>> 
>>> And I confirm I am happy to facilitate such discussions
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org]
>>> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:07 AM
>>> To: Metalitz, Steven
>>> Cc: Chris LaHatte; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position -- CSG support
>>> 
>>> Thank you Steve.  Yes, we can agree to this process to move us forward with the issue of a Vice Chair for our house.  The only additional request is that we'd like for the ombudsman to participate in the negotiations to set the procedures for 2014 (point 3 below).
>>> 
>>> Thanks again,
>>> Robin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Feb 5, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Metalitz, Steven wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear Chris,
>>> 
>>> Thank you again for facilitating our brief but productive meeting last week in Los Angeles. 
>>> 
>>> I can now confirm that the CSG can support the following approach which emerged from the meeting:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 1.       Wolf-Ulrich Knoben  will continue as vice chair until the 2013 annual meeting (Buenos Aires).  There will be no election.
>>> 2.       NCSG will have the privilege to put forward a candidate for the following year (2013-14). This candidate would have to get 8 votes to be selected.
>>> 3.       We will meet as a house no later than the London  (mid-2014) meeting to set the procedures that would apply for the term following the 2014 annual meeting (and perhaps beyond).
>>> 
>>> (When we met in LA I was under the impression that the second meeting of CY 2014 was in Singapore.  It seems ? though the ICANN announcement is not explicit ? that it will be in London.  In any case, the reference in point 3 is to the second meeting of CY 2014 as the outside date for this discussion.)
>>> 
>>> If the NCSG representatives can confirm their SG?s approval of this approach,  then I believe we can put this matter behind us.
>>> 
>>> Thanks again to all for your respective roles in reaching this conclusion.
>>> 
>>> Steve Metalitz
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 4:26 PM
>>> To: Metalitz, Steven
>>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> I am on my way
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:23 PM
>>> To: Chris LaHatte
>>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> Mockapetris room is available. Shall we convene there?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:14 PM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
>>> I am in room 412 which is a bit small-depending on who can make it here-It could fit about 6-7 at the most
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:48 AM
>>> To: Chris LaHatte
>>> Cc: Robin Gross; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> So about 1:30?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:41 AM, "Chris LaHatte" <chris.lahatte at icann.org> wrote:
>>> I can meet at lunch-we will need to find somewhere, but I am sure we can
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:38 AM
>>> To: Chris LaHatte
>>> Cc: Steven Metalitz; Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com); Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
>>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Chris and Steve.  How about a chat after the CEO speaks during lunch?
>>> 
>>> Robin
>>> 
>>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Chris LaHatte wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks for this. I have seen at least some of the exchanges. I am available except for a meeting at 3 today for about an hour, and tomorrow at 10, and at 1 to 3.45  tomorrow for a meeting with the board. I can meet early morning late evening-whenever suits.
>>> 
>>> Can I encapsulate the issue as to
>>> 
>>> 1.      Was the agreement to rotate the nomination a long term agreement or one off only?
>>> 2.      Is there any reason why, if it was one off only, why you could not agree to let the nomination proceed?
>>> By use of the term ?you? I mean both constituencies.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:07 AM
>>> To: Chris LaHatte; Robin Gross
>>> Cc: Avri Doria; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> Chris,
>>> 
>>> CSG remains glad to speak with you and with NCSG and welcomes your efforts to resolve this.  Perhaps we could find a few minutes  this afternoon (I note the slot from 1:30 to 3 includes the possibility of break out sessions. 
>>> 
>>> We disagree with the characterizations below on factual grounds.  As you already have the documentation on what the agreement and where things now stand, I won?t repeat it here.  Glad to focus on solutions going forward. 
>>> 
>>> Steve Metalitz, IPC  
>>> 
>>> From: Chris LaHatte [mailto:chris.lahatte at icann.org] 
>>> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:26 PM
>>> To: Robin Gross
>>> Cc: Avri Doria; Metalitz, Steven; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>>> Subject: RE: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> I am available to talk and perhaps discuss matters separately or together. I just bumped into Marilyn Cade who does want to talk, so perhaps something can be done
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> From: Robin Gross [mailto:robin at ipjustice.org] 
>>> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:21 PM
>>> To: Chris LaHatte
>>> Cc: Avri Doria; Steven Metalitz; Tony Holmes; Marilyn Cade; Kristina Rosette; Wendy Seltzer (wendy at seltzer.com)
>>> Subject: Re: Vice Chair Position
>>> 
>>> Dear Chris,
>>> 
>>> I would definitely like to resolve this situation this week in LA while we are here.  However, we thought we had come to an agreement to rotate turns nominating VC candidates, and if the CSG is not willing to honor that agreement we wonder how useful it would be to try to reach a "new" agreement with them.  Since their VC continues on indefinitely, as long as they don't agree to do anything else, there is no incentive for CSG to make or to honor agreements.  Given CSG's refusal to rotate turns means their candidate remains VC indefinitely, why would CSG agree to do anything?
>>> 
>>> Hope you have some useful suggestions for how we can resolve this impasse.  Or does NCSG need to file a "complaint" with the ombudsman to get CSG's attention?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Robin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> To be honest, I do not see any way beyond this impasse.  NCSG believes we had an agreement that was unilaterally abrogated by CSG.  CSG seems to beleive there was no agreement.
>>> 
>>> I see no point on coming to any further agreements without some expectation that the agreement would be honored.
>>> 
>>> I suggest we just tell the g-council chair that the NCPH, such as it is, is unable to come to agreement on how to elect a vice chair and go without one.  It is obvious that the leadership of the g-counci is permanently in CPH hands, so we might as well sit back, relax and quit trying to find agreement in a circumstance where agreement is illogical.
>>> 
>>> Chris, thanks for your willingness to moderate this issue, but I do not see the point of trying.
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 28 Jan 2013, at 13:48, Chris LaHatte wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear people
>>> I thought I should mention that I am in the Los Angeles office and available if needed on this issue. I leave on Saturday 2nd February at 10 pm so subject to my meetings schedule, I am able to meet if you want to
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Chris LaHatte
>>> Ombudsman
>>> Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
>>> Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman
>>> Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality
>>> All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential.  The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint.  The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> IP JUSTICE
>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> IP JUSTICE
>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> IP JUSTICE
>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From robin  Tue Feb 12 03:43:31 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:43:31 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
	<511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>
Message-ID: <BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>

Great!   Thank you to both Wendy Seltzer and Avri Doria for being  
willing to serve as the NCSG Policy Committee Chair and Alternate  
Chair, respectively.  And thanks to Mary for seconding both  
nominations.  Unless anyone objects in the next day, I propose we do  
the following:

There having been no other nominations in the last week, we can close  
nominations and proceed to elect our Chair and Alternate Chair.

Each member of the NCSG Policy Committee should vote for/against BOTH  
the Chair and Alternate Chair.

Please use this doodle poll to register your votes for both Chair and  
Alternate Chair:
     http://doodle.com/ab69wnddusht5z9p

We've got a one week voting period, so voting runs from 13-20  
February 2013 (close of business in California).

NCSG Charter Section 2.5.3 requires a 2/3 vote of the NCSG PC  
membership for a PC Chair to be elected and on a yearly basis.  Since  
a non-vote counts as a vote against, please do vote for/against both  
roles.

And please let me know if there are any questions or concerns.  Thanks!

Best,
Robin


On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:

> On 02/08/2013 04:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>> On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>  
>> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The  
>>> draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I  
>>> also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion  
>>> of an Alternate Chair is a great one.
>>>
>>> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)
>
> Supported by an alternate chair, I'm willing to accept the nomination.
>
> --Wendy
>
>>>
>>> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)
>>
>> thanks.
>>
>> but sure
>> if we have an alternate chair,
>> i am willing to stand for alternate chair.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
> http://wendy.seltzer.org/
> https://www.chillingeffects.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/
> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/fe7e8e28/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Tue Feb 12 04:22:52 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:22:52 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
	<511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>
	<BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <C4AABDF6-24A8-4C7E-97C9-B510DAED3CB1@ipjustice.org>

PS:  In case anyone is unsure who are the voting members of the NCSG  
Policy Committee, please the current list below and here:
   https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Committees- 
Current

Thank you,
Robin

NCSG Policy Committee Full Voting Members:
Robin Gross
Wendy Seltzer
Joy Liddicoat
Wolfgang Kleinw?chter	
Maria Farrell
Magaly Pazello
David Cake
Avri Doria
Mary Wong
Judy Branzelle
Lori Schulman






On Feb 11, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Robin Gross wrote:

> Great!   Thank you to both Wendy Seltzer and Avri Doria for being  
> willing to serve as the NCSG Policy Committee Chair and Alternate  
> Chair, respectively.  And thanks to Mary for seconding both  
> nominations.  Unless anyone objects in the next day, I propose we  
> do the following:
>
> There having been no other nominations in the last week, we can  
> close nominations and proceed to elect our Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Each member of the NCSG Policy Committee should vote for/against  
> BOTH the Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Please use this doodle poll to register your votes for both Chair  
> and Alternate Chair:
>     http://doodle.com/ab69wnddusht5z9p
>
> We've got a one week voting period, so voting runs from 13-20  
> February 2013 (close of business in California).
>
> NCSG Charter Section 2.5.3 requires a 2/3 vote of the NCSG PC  
> membership for a PC Chair to be elected and on a yearly basis.   
> Since a non-vote counts as a vote against, please do vote for/ 
> against both roles.
>
> And please let me know if there are any questions or concerns.   
> Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
>
>> On 02/08/2013 04:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>  
>>> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The  
>>>> draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I  
>>>> also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion  
>>>> of an Alternate Chair is a great one.
>>>>
>>>> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)
>>
>> Supported by an alternate chair, I'm willing to accept the  
>> nomination.
>>
>> --Wendy
>>
>>>>
>>>> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)
>>>
>>> thanks.
>>>
>>> but sure
>>> if we have an alternate chair,
>>> i am willing to stand for alternate chair.
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
>> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
>> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/
>> https://www.chillingeffects.org/
>> https://www.torproject.org/
>> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/9065c994/attachment.html>


From robin  Tue Feb 12 05:05:40 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:05:40 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [soac-discussion] Message from the ICANN Meetings
	Team - Draft Schedule Agenda
References: <CD3F120F.1D66A%david.olive@icann.org>
Message-ID: <540D27E4-E4FE-48A7-96AD-9C738E886CA6@ipjustice.org>

Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Olive <david.olive at icann.org>
> Date: February 11, 2013 6:24:31 PM PST
> To: "soac-discussion at icann.org" <soac-discussion at icann.org>
> Cc: "Tanzanica S. King" <tanzanica.king at icann.org>, Nick Tomasso  
> <nick.tomasso at icann.org>
> Subject: [soac-discussion] Message from the ICANN Meetings Team -  
> Draft Schedule Agenda
>
> Dear SO-AC Leaders:
>
>
> On behalf of the ICANN Meetings Team, attached please find a  
> confidential first draft of the schedule/agenda for the ICANN  
> Public Meeting in Beijing for your review and comments.   
> Specifically, the Meeting?s Team would like you to get your  
> feedback on the current list of ?high interest? main session  
> topics and the flow of the schedule throughout the week to make  
> sure that we are on the right track.
>
>
> Under Fadi and Sally?s direction, this first draft reflects a new  
> approach to the schedule development process with an effort to map  
> the agenda to our new organizational structure and strategy, and  
> looking to ICANN?s functional staff leads to identify and/or  
> develop the important ?high interest? session topics for their  
> areas of responsibility.
>
>
> The primary objective of this new process is the overall  
> improvement of ICANN meetings for all participants by providing  
> reasonable working hours and allowing appropriate time for breaks  
> and meals, thereby increasing the opportunity for community  
> collaboration and interaction.  This means a reduction in the  
> overall number of sessions by using pre-meeting community webinars  
> for topic updates whenever possible, and the consolidation of  
> various sessions and topics into larger single sessions to  
> eliminate overlap, and increase cross-community participation in  
> related topics.
>
>
> With the primary objective in mind, the Meetings Team has  
> constructed an initial proposed agenda featuring several ?high- 
> interest? topic sessions to be held in the main meeting room and  
> secondary ballroom on Mon/Wed/Thurs. (See attached.) The session  
> topics have already gone under considerable review by Staff and  
> Board, but it is now time for your reaction and feedback.
>
>
> Please review the attached agenda and advise if you think the major  
> sessions in the two largest rooms are the most appropriate for the  
> meeting.  They currently include sessions on the following ?high  
> interest? topics:
>
>
> ?      CEO Welcome Session  (90 minutes)
>
> ?      IDN Variants (90)
>
> ?      Next Generation TLD Directory Services (75)
>
> ?      DNS Industry Engagement (new gTLDS, Trademark Protection,  
> RAA) (90)
>
> ?      Experts Panel on ICANN Security (90)
>
> ?      Policy vs. Implementation (90)
>
> ?      ATRT Phase 2 (90)
>
> ?      Operating Plan and Budget (90)
>
> ?      IPv6 Workshop (75)
>
> ?      Internet Governance (90)
>
> ?      Stakeholder Engagement (90)
>
> ?      GNSO Council Meeting (3 hours)
>
> ?      ICANN Public Forum (4.5 hours)
>
>
>
> Your feedback at this preliminary stage will be very helpful as we  
> continue to find ways to improve the scheduling process.  I hope we  
> will be able to get your feedback even earlier in our preparations  
> for the Durban Meeting.
>
>
> Please share your reactions and thoughts on the topics and the  
> overall agenda with this list.  I will collect all the feedback  
> received by COB February 18 and share it with the Meetings Team to  
> help develop the next draft version of the schedule.
>
>
> Regards,        David
>
>
>
> --
> David A. Olive
> Vice President, Policy Development Support
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
> 1101 New York Avenue, NW - Suite 930
> Washington, D.C.    20005
> Office: 202.570.7126      Mobile:  202.341.3611
>
?
>
>
>
>
>
??



IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0004.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1C3073A1-FE98-4F72-BD32-7973F4034728[50].png
Type: image/png
Size: 2793 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0005.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1C3073A1-FE98-4F72-BD32-7973F4034728[50].png
Type: image/png
Size: 2793 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0006.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Beijing46-BlockSched-HotTopics-Feb13[2].pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 67394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130211/073625e4/attachment-0007.html>


From maria.farrell  Tue Feb 12 13:23:38 2013
From: maria.farrell (Maria Farrell)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:23:38 +0000
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <C4AABDF6-24A8-4C7E-97C9-B510DAED3CB1@ipjustice.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
	<511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>
	<BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>
	<C4AABDF6-24A8-4C7E-97C9-B510DAED3CB1@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <CAC7qwdCOM7J01jE2H7gr01+5syRbMEX5euCcaZXVfwYOcjTCnQ@mail.gmail.com>

Great stuff, thanks Robin.

FYI Doodle seems to be offline just now, but will hopefully be back up and
running pretty soon.

Maria

On 12 February 2013 02:22, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> PS:  In case anyone is unsure who are the voting members of the NCSG
> Policy Committee, please the current list below and here:
>   https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Committees-Current
>
> Thank you,
> Robin
>
> NCSG Policy Committee Full Voting Members:
> Robin Gross
> Wendy Seltzer
> Joy Liddicoat
> Wolfgang Kleinw?chter
> Maria Farrell
> Magaly Pazello
> David Cake
> Avri Doria
> Mary Wong
> Judy Branzelle
> Lori Schulman
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
>
> Great!   Thank you to both Wendy Seltzer and Avri Doria for being willing
> to serve as the NCSG Policy Committee Chair and Alternate Chair,
> respectively.  And thanks to Mary for seconding both nominations.  Unless
> anyone objects in the next day, I propose we do the following:
>
> There having been no other nominations in the last week, we can close
> nominations and proceed to elect our Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Each member of the NCSG Policy Committee should vote for/against BOTH the
> Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Please use this doodle poll to register your votes for both Chair and
> Alternate Chair:
>     http://doodle.com/ab69wnddusht5z9p
>
> We've got a one week voting period, so voting runs from *13-20 February
> 2013* (close of business in California).
>
> NCSG Charter Section 2.5.3 requires a 2/3 vote of the NCSG PC membership
> for a PC Chair to be elected and on a yearly basis.  Since a non-vote
> counts as a vote against, please do vote for/against both roles.
>
> And please let me know if there are any questions or concerns.  Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
>
> On 02/08/2013 04:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>
> On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The draft you
> circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I also agree that it can
> be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion of an Alternate Chair is a great
> one.
>
> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)
>
>
> Supported by an alternate chair, I'm willing to accept the nomination.
>
> --Wendy
>
>
> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)
>
>
> thanks.
>
> but sure
> if we have an alternate chair,
> i am willing to stand for alternate chair.
>
> avri
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
> --
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
> http://wendy.seltzer.org/
> https://www.chillingeffects.org/
> https://www.torproject.org/
> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130212/b3f3e8bf/attachment.html>


From avri  Tue Feb 12 17:38:51 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 10:38:51 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [] SCI Liaison
References: <B7E0DF7B664C4E05AC50511B958DBEA1@ron>
Message-ID: <B1E847FF-90FD-4D04-A8EC-5332554E54D4@acm.org>

FYI a letter sent by Ron, chair of the SCI.

The original suggestion, mine was that we ask the g-council to make Wolf-Ulrich the liaison since he was both a member of the SCI and on the g-council.

I agree with the point that the SCI needs a liaison from the g-council for continuity.  I think it can be any g-council member, even if that person is not already a member of the SCI.

I disagree with the notion of having an SCI member sit on the council as an observer.  I beleive, that this is mostly a means to get the BC an extra seat on the council.  But it may be more personally about Ron getting himself a seat.
As v-chair of the SCI, I do not wish to be observer on the g-council - listening to the audiocast is already enough to make me scream in frustration on a monthly basis.

avri


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Ron Andruff" <randruff at rnapartners.com>
> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCI Liaison
> Date: 11 February 2013 13:21:19 EST
> To: "'Jonathan Robinson'" <jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>
> Cc: <gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org>, <mcole at 5x5com.com>
> 
> Dear Jonathan,
>  
> Following the recent change of leadership of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI), with the former Chair being a member of the GNSO Council, the SCI is now in a situation where neither the Chair or the Vice-Chair are members of the GNSO Council. At the same time, the SCI is responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations that came out of the last GNSO review. 
>  
> The SCI considers it important to have a direct line of communication with the GNSO Council as most of the issues under consideration are a result of GNSO Council requests and SCI recommendations are likely to impact the GNSO Council operations. As a result, the SCI would like to propose that the GNSO Council consider appointing a liaison to the SCI. From the SCI's perspective, such a liaison could be appointed in two different ways: (1) a 'traditional' liaison is appointed by the GNSO Council, i.e. a member of the GNSO Council is appointed to serve as the liaison to the SCI as described in the GNSO Working Groups; or (2) the Chair and/or Vice-Chair of the SCI serve as liaisons to the GNSO Council and are able to participate as observers in GNSO Council meetings either upon invitation (when issues of relevance are discussed) or as standing observers. Obviously it is the GNSO Council's prerogative to decide on the solution that is deemed most appropriate and effective.
>  
> We look forward to receiving your feedback in due course.
>  
> Kind regards,
>  
> RA
>  
> Ronald N. Andruff
> Chair SCI
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130212/5ce37ed6/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Tue Feb 12 19:12:36 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:12:36 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [liaison6c] Draft GNSO Council agenda for 14
	February 2013 updated on 11 February 2013
References: <C4B5E5D7461AB54B875986D2919CBB5FD243F92DFD@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
Message-ID: <CF2A9880-AD04-49F6-93A4-6A667EC9EE74@ipjustice.org>

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Glen de Saint G?ry <Glen at icann.org>
> Date: February 11, 2013 3:36:12 PM PST
> To: liaison6c <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: [liaison6c] Draft GNSO Council agenda for 14 February 2013  
> updated on 11 February 2013
>
>
> Dear Councillors,
>
> Please find the updated draft agenda for the GNSO Council meeting  
> on 14 February 2013 at 11:00 UTC.
>
> The following updates have been made:
>
> Item 1.4 A link has been added to the approved minutes  for the  
> Council meeting on 21 January 2013.
> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
> After careful review of the GNSO Project List, the Council Chairs  
> propose to formally close the following projects and remove them  
> from the Project List, noting that either work is being undertaken  
> on the subject outside of the GNSO and/or that no further GNSO  
> activity is foreseen in the near future.
> Note : Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of  
> these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. These  
> projects are as follows:
> Outreach Task Force
> RAPWG Recommendation on Cross-TLD Registration Scam
> Item 6 is changed to an UPDATE and Discussion ? Board requested  
> advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and  
> acronyms (15 minutes)
> Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION ? The issue of "closed generic"  
> TLDs (15 minutes) - Staff will provide a background paper
>
> Minor updates have been made in the time allowed for some of the  
> items.
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>
> Thank you.
> Kind regards,
>
> Glen
>
> Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 2013
> The agenda is published on pages:
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14feb13-en.htm
>
> On the Wiki at:
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+-+14 
> +February+2013
>
> This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating  
> Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and  
> updated.
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12- 
> en.pdf
> For convenience:
> An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is  
> provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
> An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the  
> absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of  
> this agenda.
> Meeting Times 11:00 UTC
> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5
> Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC
> 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris;  
> 00:00 Wellington
>
> Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members.  
> Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial  
> out call is needed.
> GNSO Council meeting audio cast
> http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u
> Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
> 1.1 Roll Call
>
> 1.2 Statement of interest updates
> 1.3 Review/amend agenda
> 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the Council meeting on 17  
> January 2013  and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January  
> 2013 have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures.
>
> Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes)
> Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics
> Include brief review of Projects List and Action List
> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
> After careful review of the GNSO Project List, the Council Chairs  
> propose to formally close the following projects and remove them  
> from the Project List, noting that either work is being undertaken  
> on the subject outside of the GNSO and/or that no further GNSO  
> activity is foreseen in the near future.
> Note : Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of  
> these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. These  
> projects are as follows:
> Outreach Task Force
> RAPWG Recommendation on Cross-TLD Registration Scam
> Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION ? Recent meetings in Amsterdam &  
> LA (15 minutes)
>
> Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA.  This item  
> provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues  
> arising.
>
> 4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben)
> 4.2 Discussion
> 4.3 Next steps (if any)
>
> Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH)  
> Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes)
>
> ICANN?s CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman  
> Proposal  developed through the TMCH related implementation  
> discussions, which has been posted for public comment.http:// 
> www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm.   
> ICANN?s CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint  
> proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property  
> Constituency (BC/IPC) for a ?limited preventative registration  
> mechanism? which is also currently available for public comment.  A  
> subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN?s CEO clarified the  
> desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013.
>
> Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http:// 
> gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of  
> defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a  
> previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2).  The  
> New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether  
> additional work on defensive registrations at the second level  
> should be undertaken.
>
> The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN  
> CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any  
> additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff  
> briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations.
>
> 5.1 Update (Mason Cole)
> 5.2 Discussion
> 5.3 Next Steps
> Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Board requested advice on second  
> level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (15 minutes)
>
> At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested  that the GNSO  
> continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level  
> protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis.
>
> In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the  
> Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any  
> concern such as with the global public interest or the security or  
> stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in  
> making its decision about whether to include second level  
> protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a  
> Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant  
> Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the  
> first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be  
> protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under  
> the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int  
> gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of  
> eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be  
> listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the  
> delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013.
>
>
> 6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert)
> 6.2 Discussion
> 6.3 Next steps (if any)
> Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION ? The issue of "closed generic"  
> TLDs (15 minutes)
>
> The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to  
> request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed  
> generic" TLDs,  concurrent with the opening of the public comment  
> forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on  
> this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public  
> comment forum. (7 March)
>
> 7.1 Background (Staff)
> 7.2 Discussion
> 7.3 Next steps (if any)
> Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes)
>
> The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to  
> work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue  
> regarding the boundary between policy development and  
> implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy  
> development and integration work from the outset.
>
> Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there  
> is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same  
> time, ICANN Staff has published a paper  that is intended to  
> facilitate further community discussions on this topic.
>
> 8.1 Discussion
> 8.2 Next steps
>
> Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and  
> Reveal Study (15 minutes)
> At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results  
> of the survey that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future  
> in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal  
> requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and  
> Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead  
> with the study.
>
> 9.1 ? Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman)
> 9.2 ? Discussion
> 9.3 ? Next steps
>
> Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION ? Planning for Beijing (15 minutes)
>
> Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at  
> the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning.  Council VC  
> Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council  
> has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback
>
> 10.1 ? Update (Mason Cole)
> 10.2 ? Discussion
> 10.3 ? Next steps
>
> Item 11:  Any Other Business (5 minutes)
> Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article  
> X, Section 3)
> 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto,  
> or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a  
> GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple  
> majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below  
> shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
> a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more  
> than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
> b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as  
> described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than  
> one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one  
> House.
> c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of  
> GNSO Supermajority.
> d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an  
> affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more  
> than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
> e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires  
> an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
> f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team  
> Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve  
> an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each  
> House.
> g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of  
> a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for  
> significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO  
> Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
> h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority:  
> requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and  
> further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at  
> least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
> i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires  
> an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
> j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain  
> Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies  
> that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence  
> of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to  
> be met or exceeded.
> k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final  
> Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be  
> modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority  
> vote.
> l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the  
> Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one  
> House and a majority of the other House."
> Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4)
> 4.4.1 Applicability
> Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of  
> Council motions or measures.
> a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
> b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
> c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or  
> ICANN Bylaws;
> d. Fill a Council position open for election.
> 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within  
> the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the  
> meeting?s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at  
> the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or  
> extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is  
> verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
> 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate  
> absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide  
> reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee  
> ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web- 
> based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
> 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements.  
> (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is  
> initiated.)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN  
> hemisphere
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> California, USA (PST) UTC-8+0DST 03:00
> New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00
> Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
> Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
> Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
> London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
> Abuja, Nigeria (WAT) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
> Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST) UTC+2+0DST 13:00
> Karachi, Pakistan (PKT ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00
> Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
> Perth, Australia (WST) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
> Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 ? next day
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ------
> The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00  
> local time (with exceptions)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com
> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5
>
> Glen de Saint G?ry
> GNSO Secretariat
> gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org
> http://gnso.icann.org
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130212/eef47dc8/attachment-0001.html>


From Avri  Wed Feb 13 21:44:55 2013
From: Avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:44:55 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] The Board,
	IGO entitlement to special protections and 28 Feb
Message-ID: <427B3672-A641-4AE5-A69C-1F0E90D343A5@acm.org>

Hi,

During yesterday's meeting we discussed the irem on the g-cpuncil agenda pertaining to special protection for IGO, given the deadline of 28 Feb for Board consideration of yet another preemptive assignment of an entitlement to protection, as was done for the RCRC and IOC.

It appears that Thomas is planning to suggest that the GNSO support a decision by the Board granting entitlements to IGO names as suggest by the GAC.

Unfortunately Evan and I were the only one to speak out agains the board making the decisions at this time because:

A. it is not the same as the RCRC/IOC case since a PDP is ongoing and this prejudices that work
B.  It is not an emergency 

But Alan, the IOC and the Greg Shatan (IGO) spoke in favor of getting this new entitlement as soon as possible, so the recommendation from Thomas will be for the creation of the new entitlements, once again preempting the rule of PDP.

Note: Alan also suggested that if we don't like this or the previous RCRC/IOC entitlement decision, we should file a reconsideration.  For once, I agree with him.

I would also note that no one from the RrSg or RySG ventured an opinion.  

At this point we have, perhaps, until 28 Feb to file a statement rejecting yet another attack against the Rule of PDP.  Should we be working on one?

Also should we file a request for reconsideration of the previous decision on RCRC and IOC?  I am less sure about this because since there was no PDP in process at the time.  While the best thing for the Board to have done would have been to request a PDP, there was no rule that barred them from the making a preemptive decision as they did.  Yes it is against the pubic interest in that it erodes the confidence in the ICANN and its processes, but it is not prevented by the bylaws. 

avri


From avri  Thu Feb 14 06:51:40 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:51:40 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [NCSG-Discuss] The Board,
	IGO entitlement to special protections and 28 Feb
Message-ID: <EB0F8AF7-AB0B-4A05-842C-C4F61E2886AB@acm.org>

Hi,

Re: Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION ? Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (15 minutes)t

The following is the Board resolution that will be referenced, just in case 

BTW, the group seems to be moving toward a RPM solution space, to put in reserved names now would make a mockery of the PDP effort, probably resulting in RPM as an additional cure.

It is my belief that once a temporary reserved name entitlement is created, it will be nearly impossible to get rid of.

good luck with the call.  I expect to be listening.  let me know if you need any other background info.

cheers

avri

----
http://www.domainnews.com/en/icann-board-forecasts-special-brand-protection-to-high-profile-non-profit-organisations.html


	? IGO Name Protection

Whereas, the GAC has provided advice to the Board in its Toronto Communiqu?, stating that "in the public interest, implementation of such protection [of names and acronyms of IGOs against inappropriate registration] at the second level must be accomplished prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs, and in future rounds of gTLDs, at the second and top level."

Whereas, the GAC advice referenced the current criteria for registration under the .int top level domain (which are cited in the Applicant Guidebook as a basis for an IGO to file a legal rights objection) as a starting basis for protecting IGO names and acronyms in all new gTLDs, and advised that "this list of IGOs should be approved for interim protection through a moratorium against third?party registration prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs" pending further work on specific implementation measures.

Whereas, the GNSO is actively engaged in policy discussion regarding top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names, and has initiated a PDP on the broader issue of whether to protect these names of certain international organizations in all gTLDS.

Whereas, there is currently no policy to reserve or impose a moratorium on the registration by third parties of the names and acronyms of IGOs meeting the .int criteria in place for the second level of the current round of new gTLDs.

Whereas, the protections for the second level, if they are provided and if they are to be effective, should be in place before the delegation of the first new gTLDs.

Whereas, as previously announced, the Board favors a conservative approach, in that restrictions on second-level registration can be lifted at a later time..

RESOLVED (2012.11.26.NG01), the Board requests that the GNSO continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis.

RESOLVED (2012.11.26.NG02), the Board requests that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any concern such as with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANNto be listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013.

Rationale for Resolutions 2012.11.26.NG01 ? 2012.11.26.NG02

ICANN has received requests for additional protections for the names and acronyms of IGOs, including from the UN, from the RCRC and IOC, to prevent the registration of such names and acronyms by third parties at the second level. These are similar issues and should be considered at the same time. ICANN committed to considering the recommendations made for enhancing second-level protections for rights holders in an earlier public comment forum and in recent discussions at the Toronto Meeting and international fora such as the IGF Meeting.

In adopting this resolution at this time, the New gTLD Program Committee can remain accountable to all parts of its community, while taking action that is reasonable based on the following precedent and rationale:

		? The Board set a precedent for this request regarding IGO names with its resolution adopted on 13 September, which requested that the GNSOconsider a similar proposed solution for the first round of new gTLDs to protect the RCRC and IOC names at the second level.

		? For historical reasons, the .int top level domain includes registrations from entities that are not IGOs or those that would not qualify for registration in .int under the current eligibility criteria. As the GAC advice focused on current eligibility criteria as one of its suggested starting points for the creation of a list, it would be overbroad to extend the moratorium to all current .int registries.

In addition, there are entities that, while eligible for registration in .int, choose to not register in .int. Registration in the .int should not be a mandatory requirement. It is for that reason that the requirements for protection do not require registration in .int, only a demonstration that the entity would qualify under the current eligibility criteria for .int. Therefore, the resolution is only as broad as necessary, limiting a list to those names and acronyms meeting the current eligibility criteria for .int and who apply toICANN for inclusion in the moratorium. This also allows those eligible IGOs that wish to register second level names within new gTLDs the opportunity to not participate in the moratorium.

		? As reflected in the underlying rationale for the 13 September 2012 (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-13sep12-en.htm) resolution with respect to Red Cross/Red Crescent and International Olympic Committee names, the Board favors a conservative approach, and that restrictions on second-level registration can be lifted at a later time, but restrictions cannot be applied retroactively after domain names are registered. That same rationale applies for IGO names and acronyms at the second-level of the first round of new gTLDs.

		? Consistent with the Board's Singapore resolution with respect to the IOC and Red Cross issues, the New gTLD Program Committee believes that the appropriate course is for the Board to ultimately leave these issues in the hands of ICANN's policy-making bodies. The Committee appreciates the efforts by the GNSO in initiating an expedited PDP to develop recommendations to provide any necessary additional protections for IGOand INGO names at the top and second-levels in all gTLDs. ICANN staff members are supporting that discussion in the GNSO, and the new gTLDCommittee awaits the results of these policy discussions.

This action is not expected to have an immediate impact on the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS. This action is also not expected to have a significant impact on financial or other resources of ICANN.

	? RCRC IOC Protection

Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee on 13 September 2012 requested that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 31 January 2013 if it is aware of any reason, such as concerns with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names listed in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook by inclusion on a Reserved Names List applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program.

Whereas, the new gTLD Committee acknowledges that the GNSO Council has recently approved an expedited PDP to develop policy recommendations to protect the names and acronyms of IGOs and certain INGOs ? including the RCRC and IOC, in all gTLDs.

Whereas, although the GNSO Council's 15 November motion did not pass due to a procedural technicality, the GNSO Council will vote again on a motion at its 20 December meeting to adopt the IOC/RC Drafting Team's recommendation to temporarily reserve the exact match of IOC and RCRC second level domain names listed in Section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, pending the outcome of the recently launched PDP.

RESOLVED (2012.11.26.NG03), in light of these upcoming policy discussions to take place in the PDP involving the protection of International Governmental and Non-governmental Organizations, restrictions for registration of RCRC and IOC names for new gTLDs at the second level will be in place until such time as a policy is adopted that may require further action.

Rationale for Resolution 2012.11.26.NG03

Given the Committee's 13 September resolution as well as the high-level and community-wide attention on this issue, it is important for the Committee to indicate that the protections it has recommended for the RCRC and IOC names at the second level of the first round of new gTLDs will be adopted until a policy is developed. In adopting this resolution at this time, the New gTLD Program Committee can take action that is reasonable based on the following rationale:

		? Consistent with the Board's Singapore resolution with respect to the IOC and Red Cross issues, the new gTLD Committee believes that the appropriate course is for the Board to leave these issues in the hands of ICANN's policy-making bodies. The Committee appreciates the efforts by the GNSOin initiating an expedited PDP to develop recommendations to provide any necessary additional protections for IGO and INGO names at the top and second-levels in all gTLDs. ICANN staff members are supporting that discussion in the GNSO, and the new gTLD Committee awaits the results of these policy discussions.

		? The Committee has been apprised that the motion to grant temporary protections to the RCRC and the IOC has been resubmitted to the GNSOCouncil and, having looked at the issue with voting on same resolution when it was considered on 15 November 2012, the Committee expects the Council to adopt the recommendation to provide such special protection for the RCRC and IOC names at its meeting on 20 December 2012. Recognizing the likelihood that the GNSO Council's motion will pass, the Committee believes that it is appropriate to adopt this resolution at the same time as consideration of the IGO issue, as a temporary measure, while the GNSOCouncil proceeds with the expedited PDP.

		? In adopting this resolution at this time, the New gTLD Program Committee can reassure the impacted stakeholders in the community, acknowledge and encourage the continuing work of the GNSO Council, and take an action consistent with its 13 September 2012 resolution.

This action is not expected to have an immediate impact on the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS, though the outcomes of this work may result in positive impacts. This action is also not expected to have an impact on financial or other resources of ICANN.


From avri  Thu Feb 14 15:06:27 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 08:06:27 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [] The Board,
	IGO entitlement to special protections  and 28 Feb
In-Reply-To: <7913CA22-2EA1-4049-8798-2587A7EBDF6B@isoc.be>
References: <427B3672-A641-4AE5-A69C-1F0E90D343A5@acm.org>
	<BLU0-SMTP21287ED547F645110478E6DDF080@phx.gbl>
	<245D34FF25244992881FDC2B8F49F154@KlausPC>
	<511BFC2A0200005B000A1EA6@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.1302131839120.18865@mail.alembic.net>
	<201302140253.r1E2rguw030548@tiassa.meiji.ac.jp>
	<7913CA22-2EA1-4049-8798-2587A7EBDF6B@isoc.be>
Message-ID: <E715A93E-6F30-4D09-8DA3-95C4C6D10A07@ACM.ORG>

Hi,

(report while listening to the g-council meeting)

And as RCRC and IOC have already been granted the special protections, at least temporarily*, we are seeing all sorts of organization who claim to have the same or greater merit for such protections.  If the Board grants temporary* special protections to IGOs, contrary to previous GNSO action** to postpone the work, the clarion call will be even greater.

Today, Thomas gave a fair review of the situation in the PDP WG, though he does maintain the postion, that the letter to the Board should indicate that the GNSO supports the temporary* reservations.

David Cake spoke on the NCSG position on the issue.

avri


* "nothing so permanent as a temporary solution" not sure of the origin of this quote.

**  or perhaps inaction - history

GNSO 20070627-3
"The GNSO Council thanks the Staff for the Issues Report on dispute handling for IGO names and abbreviations.
The council accepts the recommendation that a PDP not be initiated at this time, and that the staff continue as proposed in the issues report on page 16.
The council requests that the staff report back to the council within 3 months. The council will reconsider creating a PDP at that time."

GNSO 20071120-1 - Postponed a decsion to intiate a PDP until a later time

and it appears the council did not get back to it until 2012 and this PDP.



On 14 Feb 2013, at 07:07, Rudi Vansnick wrote:

> Fully agree with Andrew, once one obtains the right many others will stand up and request same right.
> 
> Rudi Vansnick
> 
> 
> Op 14-feb-2013, om 03:53 heeft Andrew A. Adams het volgende geschreven:
> 
>> I seem to recall that our (NCUC, perhaps not NPOC) view on the Board's 
>> decision to grant IOC/ICRC protections without a PDP represented the nose of 
>> the camel in the tent and that this would likely lead to an attempt by the 
>> rest of the IGO community to believe that they could expect similar 
>> treatment). Our prediction is coming true, and this is the rest of the camel 
>> being pushed into the tent. I fully support strong efforts to push for a 
>> proper measured PDP approach to solving this issue and against these ad hoc 
>> special treatments for special interests.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
>> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
>> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
>> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/
> 




From robin  Sat Feb 16 20:52:00 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 10:52:00 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Duties of the Role of the Chair of the NCSG Policy
	Committee
In-Reply-To: <BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>
References: <5DDB7F97-4583-467D-A84A-287EB6FE3A60@ipjustice.org>
	<19F26175-AE6F-4EA0-8D5C-6E8B3B57F671@acm.org>
	<510FAF6B0200005B000A132D@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<97056988-03DE-47BA-89D8-E28F3BB1A1FA@acm.org>
	<511974D3.4020600@seltzer.com>
	<BB9C61C9-64EF-4053-890A-A5F007B482A1@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <4ACF8CC5-CB7D-4713-8511-5D26805D4F1C@ipjustice.org>

Reminder:  Please vote for PC Chair and Vice-Chair before 20 Feb.
    http://www.doodle.com/ab69wnddusht5z9p

The following people have not voted yet:
Mary Wong
Joy Liddicoat
Judy Branzelle
Lori Schulman
Wolfgang Kleinwachter
Wendy Seltzer

We need *at least* 7 votes for each candidate for them to be elected  
under the bylaws.  Please remember that an abstention counts as a  
vote against, so please, please vote.  We really need a PC Chair.

Thank you!
Robin


On Feb 11, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Robin Gross wrote:

> Great!   Thank you to both Wendy Seltzer and Avri Doria for being  
> willing to serve as the NCSG Policy Committee Chair and Alternate  
> Chair, respectively.  And thanks to Mary for seconding both  
> nominations.  Unless anyone objects in the next day, I propose we  
> do the following:
>
> There having been no other nominations in the last week, we can  
> close nominations and proceed to elect our Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Each member of the NCSG Policy Committee should vote for/against  
> BOTH the Chair and Alternate Chair.
>
> Please use this doodle poll to register your votes for both Chair  
> and Alternate Chair:
>     http://doodle.com/ab69wnddusht5z9p
>
> We've got a one week voting period, so voting runs from 13-20  
> February 2013 (close of business in California).
>
> NCSG Charter Section 2.5.3 requires a 2/3 vote of the NCSG PC  
> membership for a PC Chair to be elected and on a yearly basis.   
> Since a non-vote counts as a vote against, please do vote for/ 
> against both roles.
>
> And please let me know if there are any questions or concerns.   
> Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Robin
>
>
> On Feb 11, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
>
>> On 02/08/2013 04:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4 Feb 2013, at 12:54, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>  
>>> <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree, and thanks, Robin, for getting the details started. The  
>>>> draft you circulated about the Chair's role sounds good, and I  
>>>> also agree that it can be a fair bit of work. Avri's suggestion  
>>>> of an Alternate Chair is a great one.
>>>>
>>>> And may I vote for Wendy as Chair while I'm at it? :)
>>
>> Supported by an alternate chair, I'm willing to accept the  
>> nomination.
>>
>> --Wendy
>>
>>>>
>>>> And nominate Avri for Alternate Chair? :) :)
>>>
>>> thanks.
>>>
>>> but sure
>>> if we have an alternate chair,
>>> i am willing to stand for alternate chair.
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
>> Policy Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
>> Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
>> http://wendy.seltzer.org/
>> https://www.chillingeffects.org/
>> https://www.torproject.org/
>> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130216/091d0603/attachment.html>


From rafik.dammak  Sun Feb 17 14:43:13 2013
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:43:13 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <F0F3E5A9-9C19-4721-8A72-C247AA247A3A@ipjustice.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<F3E41C0C-710D-4176-B6D5-FD05DDF60306@uzh.ch>
	<F0F3E5A9-9C19-4721-8A72-C247AA247A3A@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThkreJJx9HNPpT6BUMGd5HaiWzFGBkjtm1HaHwV4K_96Kw@mail.gmail.com>

agree with Robin, we need to push and push, I am afraid to see still some
gaps between the discourse and the reality in the ground from ICANN,I guess
official letter will rise official response.

Rafik

2013/2/11 Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>

>  I think we should send a letter to Fadi and ask that he include
> Non-Commercial participants in these engagement plans.
>
> ICANN is making all sorts of plans to engage business these days.  And
> these MIG initiatives should certainly include non-commercial actors.  If
> we send a simple friendly letter welcoming further engagement, but
> reminding them we need to be a part of these engagement initiatives, it
> could be helpful.   If ICANN wants to say it is "bottom up", it has to
> include us bottom-dwellers in the plans.  And we can also put an ask for
> the civil society roundtable in writing on the ICANN website, where ICANN
> will have to publicly respond.  Let's see if we can encourage the new
> leadership to understand the importance of reaching out to non-commercial
> participants with the same zeal it does to commercial participants.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
>
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 8:23 AM, William Drake wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and
> suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that
> there are some that might see it as harmful.
>
>
> I can't say I understand this from either a substantive or NCUC
> perspective; it seems like the same debate we had with Alain sometime ago
> when he wanted thought the academics should be split off from NCUC.
>
>
> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different perspectives,
> that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern and the
> perspective these two groups take as very different.
>
>
> I've not notice this in four+ years.  Could you give some examples?
>
> BTW have people read the transcripts of Fadi's meeting with CSG in LA?  He
> apparently has an activity in the works that you'd have thought CS might
> have been consulted on?maybe ALAC has?
>
> from p. 27
>
>
> *we will be doing a series of events around the planet called
> Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance - we're dubbing them MIG Works.
> Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance Works. The first MIG Works will be in
> the Arab region and the second one will be in Africa (this Dubai).
>
> We're doing both of these in March by the way, doing these not as ICANN
> but with the rest of our fellow organizations ,so ISOC is involved, the
> RRI's are involved - all of these organizations are involved with us in
> this effort. This is not an effort to talk to governments, this is an
> effort to talk to the multi- stakeholders in this region and to tell them
> two things. That multi- stakeholders works and that's how it works and
> secondly to engage them in participating in the multi-stakeholder (in
> Dubai).*
>
>
> Anyone here approached by staff about participating in MIG Works meetings?
>
> Could this be part of what Miss Cade had in mind in saying that CS knows
> nuttin about Internet governance?to discourage our inclusion in such?  I
> wasn't in the room when she said it, to my regret?
>
> BD
>
>
>
> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
>
> avri
>
> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see CS
> as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share
> values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry
> between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and
>  diversity is not bad.
>
> wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
> An: Avri Doria
> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see the
> advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS
> roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine
> a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
>
> Bill
>
> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
>
> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
>
> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful would be
> ideas on:
>
> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
> intersect.
>
>
>
> avri
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri <avri>@ella.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
> To: Fadi Chehade
> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
>
> Hi,
>
> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you plan,
> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO Executive
> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
> governance academics.
>
> Again, the LA meeting was good.
>
> Best of luck,
>
> avri
>
>
>
> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
>
> Dear Avri,
>
>
> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your idea
> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.  The
> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to encourage
> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they find
> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to work
> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties unfamiliar
> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new gTLDS
> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on reputational
> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
>
> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society Organizations
> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to create
> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions aren't
> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there is an
> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need to
> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy forums.
>
> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear your
> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me know
> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am cc-in my
> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights as
> well.
>
> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Christopher Mondini
> Vice President, Business Engagement
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>
> chris.mondini at icann.org
> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
>
> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130217/1299379f/attachment.html>


From rafik.dammak  Sun Feb 17 14:48:48 2013
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:48:48 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>

any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the term
"leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am not
sure that only institutions and organizations are only the representative
of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that many individuals
 highly involved and being part of many communities like free software, FoE
etc are no member of any structure, some of those individuals are really
doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS for example, that is
probably totally different from the perspective of big
non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.


Rafik

ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose
called vena diagram :)


2013/2/10 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>

> Correction.
>
> This is _not_ a discussions with us, the same old voices ...
>
>
> On 10 Feb 2013, at 09:18, Avri Doria wrote:
>
> >
> > Ps.  This is a discussion with us, the same old voices, though some may
> be invited, I have no idea.  This is about reaching out to the leaders who
> may not be participating.  We have a lot of problem getting many of the
> premiere NGOs participating so that was my first priority in making the
> personal suggestion I made - I did not make it as a NCSG member.   Talking
> to academic too, was a further thought, but as I say, academics are
> different from NGO activists and have different concerns and modalities.
> >
> > avri
> >
> >
> > On 10 Feb 2013, at 09:13, Avri Doria wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Since I proposed that there be 2 round tables instead of just one and
> suggested the split, I will continue suggesting it,.  I will mention that
> there are some that might see it as harmful.
> >>
> >> I see the role of advocacy and analysis as having different
> perspectives, that is why I suggested it.  I also the content  of concern
> and the perspective these two groups take as very different.
> >>
> >> I was looking for advice on the topic issue.
> >>
> >> avri
> >>
> >> On 10 Feb 2013, at 05:02, Kleinw?chter, Wolfgang wrote:
> >>
> >>> I can only support Bill: We have to avoid this "splitting" and to see
> CS as one animal with different wings.We have common interests and share
> values but there are certainly specifics. To organoze too much rivalry
> between different wings of CS is not helpful althougn some competition and
>  diversity is not bad.
> >>>
> >>> wolfgang
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>>
> >>> Von: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org im Auftrag von William Drake
> >>> Gesendet: So 10.02.2013 10:41
> >>> An: Avri Doria
> >>> Cc: NCSG-Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> >>> Betreff: Re: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: Civil Society Roundtables
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> Why further divide us into NGO and academic?  I'm hard pressed to see
> the advantages of doubling down on the splintering, but do think a CS
> roundtable would be great.  Ahead of something like that one could imagine
> a serious collective effort to do a mapping exercise, long overdue....
> >>>
> >>> Bill
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 10, 2013, at 1:28, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I sent off the following message to Fadi after the meting.
> >>>>
> >>>> I got a reply from Chris, and plan to talk him later this week.
> >>>>
> >>>> Any helpful clues from you all would be great. Especially helpful
> would be ideas on:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS developments
> >>>>> intersect.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at ella.com]
> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:30 AM
> >>>>>> To: Fadi Chehade
> >>>>>> Subject: Civil Society Rountables
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One thing I had meant to mention while in LA, but never found the
> >>>>>> opportunity:  I think that among the leaders' roundtables that you
> plan,
> >>>>>> I recommend that you consider doing one with Civil Society NGO
> Executive
> >>>>>> Directors etc.. and another with Civil Society's prominent Internet
> >>>>>> governance academics.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Again, the LA meeting was good.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best of luck,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I got permission to pass this on to co-workers
> >>>>
> >>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: Chris Mondini <chris.mondini at icann.org>
> >>>>> Subject: FW: Civil Society Roundtables
> >>>>> Date: 5 February 2013 12:08:15 EST
> >>>>> To: "avri at ella.com" <avri at ella.com>
> >>>>> Cc: Nora Abusitta <nora.abusitta at icann.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear Avri,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fadi passed your note to me and asked me to respond.  He thinks your
> idea
> >>>>> is a good one and asked me to speak with you to get a plan underway.
>  The
> >>>>> CEO roundtables have been envisioned largely as a way for him to
> encourage
> >>>>> Domain Name businesses to understand the scrutiny under which they
> find
> >>>>> themselves from governments and the public and to encourage them to
> work
> >>>>> together to focus on their reputation and to educate parties
> unfamiliar
> >>>>> with the DNS in anticipation of the increased attention that new
> gTLDS
> >>>>> will bring.   As a result, the agenda items have focused on
> reputational
> >>>>> analysis, Wall Street views, and Defining the DNS Industry.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I suspect that Executive Directors of NGOs and Civil Society
> Organizations
> >>>>> would have a separate set of interests, so I will need your help to
> create
> >>>>> the Venn Diagram of where NGO strategic interests and DNS
> developments
> >>>>> intersect.   Please keep in mind that the roundtable discussions
> aren't
> >>>>> about ICANN or ICANN policy making, but rather about bigger picture
> >>>>> issues, such as the value that the DNS and the scalable interoperable
> >>>>> internet bring to social discourse and civil society and where there
> is an
> >>>>> alignment of interests among players in the DNS ecosystem.   We need
> to
> >>>>> avoid any topics that are already being covered in ICANN policy
> forums.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As for Internet Governance Academics, I will be interested to hear
> your
> >>>>> thoughts on what would be of interest to them, too!.  Please let me
> know
> >>>>> when would be a good time for you to speak about your idea.  I am
> cc-in my
> >>>>> colleague Nora Abusitta who is responsible for engagement with
> >>>>> international organizations, as she may be able to provide insights
> as
> >>>>> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks again and I look forward to speaking with you.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Kind regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Christopher Mondini
> >>>>> Vice President, Business Engagement
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> >>>>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300; Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
> >>>>>
> >>>>> chris.mondini at icann.org
> >>>>> +1 (310) 578-8658 (direct)
> >>>>> +1 (650) 796-4665 (mobile)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Skype: chris.mondini.icann
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> PC-NCSG mailing list
> >>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> >>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PC-NCSG mailing list
> > PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> > http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130217/fd6f7851/attachment-0001.html>


From rafik.dammak  Sun Feb 17 15:53:37 2013
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik)
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:53:37 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [soac-discussion] Message from the ICANN
	Meetings Team - Draft Schedule Agenda
In-Reply-To: <540D27E4-E4FE-48A7-96AD-9C738E886CA6@ipjustice.org>
References: <CD3F120F.1D66A%david.olive@icann.org>
	<540D27E4-E4FE-48A7-96AD-9C738E886CA6@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <57C278F7-CA1A-48B5-BDB3-B6655829D0F8@gmail.com>

Hello,

I am not sure about the proposed changes, but if there will be less workshops, it can be helpful for better coverage, and how the community members will have enough space to discuss and interact?
Is there any draft schedule for gnso working sessions in Saturday and Sunday?I also see that there scheduled session for gnso in Monday? 

Best,

Rafik


Le 12 Feb 2013 ? 12:05, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> a ?crit :

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: David Olive <david.olive at icann.org>
>> Date: February 11, 2013 6:24:31 PM PST
>> To: "soac-discussion at icann.org" <soac-discussion at icann.org>
>> Cc: "Tanzanica S. King" <tanzanica.king at icann.org>, Nick Tomasso <nick.tomasso at icann.org>
>> Subject: [soac-discussion] Message from the ICANN Meetings Team - Draft Schedule Agenda
>> 
>> Dear SO-AC Leaders:
>> 
>>  
>> On behalf of the ICANN Meetings Team, attached please find a confidential first draft of the schedule/agenda for the ICANN Public Meeting in Beijing for your review and comments.  Specifically, the Meeting?s Team would like you to get your feedback on the current list of ?high interest? main session topics and the flow of the schedule throughout the week to make sure that we are on the right track. 
>> 
>>  
>> Under Fadi and Sally?s direction, this first draft reflects a new approach to the schedule development process with an effort to map the agenda to our new organizational structure and strategy, and looking to ICANN?s functional staff leads to identify and/or develop the important ?high interest? session topics for their areas of responsibility.
>> 
>>  
>> The primary objective of this new process is the overall improvement of ICANN meetings for all participants by providing reasonable working hours and allowing appropriate time for breaks and meals, thereby increasing the opportunity for community collaboration and interaction.  This means a reduction in the overall number of sessions by using pre-meeting community webinars for topic updates whenever possible, and the consolidation of various sessions and topics into larger single sessions to eliminate overlap, and increase cross-community participation in related topics.
>> 
>>  
>> With the primary objective in mind, the Meetings Team has constructed an initial proposed agenda featuring several ?high-interest? topic sessions to be held in the main meeting room and secondary ballroom on Mon/Wed/Thurs. (See attached.) The session topics have already gone under considerable review by Staff and Board, but it is now time for your reaction and feedback.
>> 
>>  
>> Please review the attached agenda and advise if you think the major sessions in the two largest rooms are the most appropriate for the meeting.  They currently include sessions on the following ?high interest? topics:
>> 
>>  
>> ?      CEO Welcome Session  (90 minutes)
>> 
>> ?      IDN Variants (90)
>> 
>> ?      Next Generation TLD Directory Services (75)
>> 
>> ?      DNS Industry Engagement (new gTLDS, Trademark Protection, RAA) (90)
>> 
>> ?      Experts Panel on ICANN Security (90)
>> 
>> ?      Policy vs. Implementation (90)
>> 
>> ?      ATRT Phase 2 (90)
>> 
>> ?      Operating Plan and Budget (90)
>> 
>> ?      IPv6 Workshop (75)
>> 
>> ?      Internet Governance (90)
>> 
>> ?      Stakeholder Engagement (90)
>> 
>> ?      GNSO Council Meeting (3 hours)
>> 
>> ?      ICANN Public Forum (4.5 hours)
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Your feedback at this preliminary stage will be very helpful as we continue to find ways to improve the scheduling process.  I hope we will be able to get your feedback even earlier in our preparations for the Durban Meeting.
>> 
>>  
>> Please share your reactions and thoughts on the topics and the overall agenda with this list.  I will collect all the feedback received by COB February 18 and share it with the Meetings Team to help develop the next draft version of the schedule.
>> 
>>  
>> Regards,        David
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> --
>> David A. Olive
>> Vice President, Policy Development Support
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>> 1101 New York Avenue, NW - Suite 930 
>> Washington, D.C.    20005
>> Office: 202.570.7126      Mobile:  202.341.3611
>> 
> <1C3073A1-FE98-4F72-BD32-7973F4034728[50].png>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> <1C3073A1-FE98-4F72-BD32-7973F4034728[50].png>
> <Beijing46-BlockSched-HotTopics-Feb13[2].pdf>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130217/bea45707/attachment-0001.html>


From avri  Sun Feb 17 16:11:59 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 09:11:59 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>

Hi,

I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting for the write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.  So I had not yet gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.

- 'doubling down on splintering'

First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co-volunteers objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I had proposed.  He not only wanted to keep those separate, he wanted to separate the discussion with NGOs into two groups:

- Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly smaller organizations
- Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic operations in the global public interest - the big organizations

- As for 'leaders.'  

I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my innate disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my pragmatic attitude in this conversation.  These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few other leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of conversations with lots of Non Commercials and other civil society, in this case, I was presenting an argument for why his roundtable series should extend to Non Commercial leaders.  If we want to present ideas for other events with other kinds of voices, we should develop specific proposals.  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get something opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high level event".  My personal suggestion that started the discussions was the simple proposition that he needed to do with Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of leadership roundtable he is having with Business. I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign, though I do support the idea of other types of campaign.

- On individuals not institutions.

His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads of other organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps if/when we get to academic, that can be expanded to other prominent members of Civil society who are not academic.  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10 individuals he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting with the some of the individual people who hate ICANN would be a different sort of beast.  and perhaps this is what NCSG should work up a proposal on - something similar to what is done at ICANn meeting for the business community should be done for the civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.  But that is something different than this, and for now, I am working on this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think we should present it.

- When and Where

Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places where these leaders may already be.  He is worried about the ability to actually pull these leaders to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest possible events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best opportunities for co-scheduling.  I am looking into other opportunities for the non-Ig NGO leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.  We have not gotten down to specific invitees yet.  

- Topics

As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis (not at all a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing it is a Biz thing), the topics we discussed:

1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the roundtables with Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being talked about.  In terms of discussions with civil society organizations and academic, it would be ICANN's reputation.  I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's reputation especially among Civil society, I really do not think they know.  I think many think that what they do for ALAC is enough to make civil society happy.  I started my work on disabusing them of this notion.

2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale operational requirements

3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in the various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation can be facilitated

Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC where I volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization efforts and issue of institutional capture.

That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee yet, but wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more formal report of the meeting, I will share it.  

Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as a representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to tell him what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision to try and do it by semi-private email instead of public assault. Sometimes I think public assault in the blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to try to quiet way.

avri


*  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have a Vice President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been encouraging Fadi to think about this.  We also discussed this gap during the phone call - I mentioned some of  our disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc were totally ignored in their engagement plans.

On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:

> any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
> for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am not sure that only institutions and organizations are only the representative of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that many individuals  highly involved and being part of many communities like free software, FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS for example, that is probably totally different from the perspective of big non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.
> 
> 
> Rafik 
> 
> ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose called vena diagram :)
> 
> 




From rafik.dammak  Mon Feb 18 12:07:18 2013
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:07:18 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Avri,

Thanks for the udpate,


>
> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting for the
> write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.  So I had not yet
> gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.
>

maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?

>
> - 'doubling down on splintering'
>
> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co-volunteers
> objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I had proposed.  He not
> only wanted to keep those separate, he wanted to separate the discussion
> with NGOs into two groups:
>

I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is happening
already in his visit to Asia and in japan in particular (I think you
already saw the message from Izumi in At-large list), the meeting are seen
as PR and communication more than real engagement IMHO, but I will be glad
to see my assumption contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the
content of blog post about LA meeting.

for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in dubai and
adis abeba?
the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries-registrars
meeting in amsterdam?
also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users summit where
they will all non-commercials without distinction.


> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly smaller
> organizations

- Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic operations in
> the global public interest - the big organizations
>

yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why inviting
"leaders".

>
> - As for 'leaders.'
>
> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my innate
> disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my pragmatic attitude
> in this conversation.


I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to encourage its
usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing such corporate culture to
ICANN , that will be self-defeating.


 These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few other
> leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of conversations
> with lots of Non Commercials and other civil society, in this case, I was
> presenting an argument for why his roundtable series should extend to Non
> Commercial leaders.  If we want to present ideas for other events with
> other kinds of voices, we should develop specific proposals.


ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.


>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get something
> opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high level event".  My
> personal suggestion that started the discussions was the simple proposition
> that he needed to do with Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of
> leadership roundtable he is having with Business.


yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then registrars, and
probably with business but he dont divide them in sub-categories.


> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign, though I do
> support the idea of other types of campaign.
>
not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.


>
> - On individuals not institutions.
>
> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads of other
> organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps if/when we get to
> academic, that can be expanded to other prominent members of Civil society
> who are not academic.


back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.


>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about
> individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10 individuals
> he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting with the some of the
> individual people who hate ICANN would be a different sort of beast.  and
> perhaps this is what NCSG should work up a proposal on - something similar
> to what is done at ICANn meeting for the business community should be done
> for the civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in
> Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.
>  But that is something different than this, and for now, I am working on
> this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think we should present it.
>
> OK for the last sentence.


> - When and Where
>
> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places where
> these leaders may already be.  He is worried about the ability to actually
> pull these leaders to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest
> possible events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva
> consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best opportunities for
> co-scheduling.  I am looking into other opportunities for the non-Ig NGO
> leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.  We have not gotten down to specific
> invitees yet.
>
> - Topics
>
> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis (not at all
> a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing it is a Biz thing),
> the topics we discussed:
>
> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the roundtables with
> Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being talked about.  In terms of
> discussions with civil society organizations and academic, it would be
> ICANN's reputation.


well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of processes ,
respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is not PR exercise because
outsiders have really little trust on ICANN, we are the few believers and
somehow trasher by ICANN itself.

 I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's reputation
> especially among Civil society, I really do not think they know.  I think
> many think that what they do for ALAC is enough to make civil society
> happy.  I started my work on disabusing them of this notion.
>
> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that "minimal
service" is enough.


> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale operational
> requirements
>
> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in the
> various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation can be
> facilitated
>
> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC where I
> volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization efforts and issue
> of institutional capture.
>

I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate there too.

>
> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee yet, but
> wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more formal report of the
> meeting, I will share it.
>
> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as a
> representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to tell him
> what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision to try and do it
> by semi-private email instead of public assault. Sometimes I think public
> assault in the blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to
> try to quiet way.
>
>
that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)



>
> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have a Vice
> President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been encouraging Fadi to think
> about this.  We also discussed this gap during the phone call - I mentioned
> some of  our disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc
> were totally ignored in their engagement plans.
>

+1 and we need to keep pressure in that side,

Thanks again Avri,

Rafik

>
> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
> > any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
> > for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the
> term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am
> not sure that only institutions and organizations are only the
> representative of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that
> many individuals  highly involved and being part of many communities like
> free software, FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those
> individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS
> for example, that is probably totally different from the perspective of big
> non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.
> >
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> > ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose
> called vena diagram :)
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/7ac54001/attachment.html>


From william.drake  Mon Feb 18 21:18:52 2013
From: william.drake (William Drake)
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 20:18:52 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E6B4EF1E-2D8B-44B3-BA41-744990CDE875@uzh.ch>

Hi

On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Avri,
> 
> Thanks for the udpate,
> 
> 
> 
> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting for the write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.  So I had not yet gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.
> 
> maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?   
> 
> - 'doubling down on splintering'
> 
> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co-volunteers objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I had proposed.  He not only wanted to keep those separate, he wanted to separate the discussion with NGOs into two groups:
> 
> I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is happening already in his visit to Asia and in japan in particular (I think you already saw the message from Izumi in At-large list), the meeting are seen as PR and communication more than real engagement IMHO, but I will be glad to see my assumption contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the content of blog post about LA meeting.

It's just so refreshing to have the Vice President of Business Engagement in charge of defining civil society and which players merit what kinds of inclusion.  So I guess "NGOs" means the paid staff of NGOs, not their members and fellow travelers, who might include (gasp) academics.  
> 
> for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in dubai and adis abeba?
> the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries-registrars meeting in amsterdam?
> also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users summit where they will all non-commercials without distinction.
> 
> 
> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly smaller organizations 
> - Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic operations in the global public interest - the big organizations

So the real interest is probably not "NGOs" generally, but rather the "right kind of NGOs" that some ICANN vets have said were supposed to have been the CS contingent all along?When oh when are Oxfam et al going to call and say domain names are their priority now?

> 
> yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why inviting "leaders".
> 
> - As for 'leaders.'
> 
> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my innate disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my pragmatic attitude in this conversation.
> 
> I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to encourage its usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing such corporate culture to ICANN , that will be self-defeating.
> 
> 
>  These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few other leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of conversations with lots of Non Commercials and other civil society, in this case, I was presenting an argument for why his roundtable series should extend to Non Commercial leaders.  If we want to present ideas for other events with other kinds of voices, we should develop specific proposals.
> 
> ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.

Ditto
>  
>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get something opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high level event".  My personal suggestion that started the discussions was the simple proposition that he needed to do with Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of leadership roundtable he is having with Business.
> 
> yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then registrars, and probably with business but he dont divide them in sub-categories.
>  
> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign, though I do support the idea of other types of campaign.
> not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.
>  
> 
> - On individuals not institutions.
> 
> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads of other organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps if/when we get to academic, that can be expanded to other prominent members of Civil society who are not academic.

or NGO staff??
> 
> back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.
>  
>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10 individuals he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting with the some of the individual people who hate ICANN would be a different sort of beast.  and perhaps this is what NCSG should work up a proposal on - something similar to what is done at ICANn meeting for the business community should be done for the civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.  But that is something different than this, and for now, I am working on this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think we should present it.
> 
> OK for the last sentence.
>  
> - When and Where
> 
> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places where these leaders may already be.  

Maybe he could lurk around outside Security Council and Human Rights Council meetings with some 'join the new gTLD program' pamphlets...

> He is worried about the ability to actually pull these leaders to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest possible events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best opportunities for co-scheduling.  I am looking into other opportunities for the non-Ig NGO leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.  We have not gotten down to specific invitees yet.
> 
> - Topics
> 
> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis (not at all a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing it is a Biz thing), the topics we discussed:
> 
> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the roundtables with Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being talked about.  In terms of discussions with civil society organizations and academic, it would be ICANN's reputation.
> 
> well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of processes , respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is not PR exercise because outsiders have really little trust on ICANN, we are the few believers and somehow trasher by ICANN itself.

Oh the irony
> 
>  I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's reputation especially among Civil society, I really do not think they know.  I think many think that what they do for ALAC is enough to make civil society happy.  I started my work on disabusing them of this notion.

Perhaps we could organize a close encounter at the IGF?
> 
> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that "minimal service" is enough.
>  
> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale operational requirements
> 
> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in the various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation can be facilitated
> 
> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC where I volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization efforts and issue of institutional capture.
> 
> I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate there too. 

We've been raising these in NCSG meetings with the board etc. for years and no traction.  Something written would really help.
> 
> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee yet, but wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more formal report of the meeting, I will share it.
> 
> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as a representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to tell him what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision to try and do it by semi-private email instead of public assault. Sometimes I think public assault in the blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to try to quiet way.
> 
> 
> that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)

Si
> 
>  
> 
> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have a Vice President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been encouraging Fadi to think about this.  We also discussed this gap during the phone call - I mentioned some of  our disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc were totally ignored in their engagement plans.
> 
> +1 and we need to keep pressure in that side, 

+2 BD
> 
> Thanks again Avri,
> 
> Rafik
> 
> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> 
> > any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
> > for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am not sure that only institutions and organizations are only the representative of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that many individuals  highly involved and being part of many communities like free software, FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS for example, that is probably totally different from the perspective of big non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.
> >
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> > ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose called vena diagram :)
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/32e4a6c3/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Mon Feb 18 22:04:59 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:04:59 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <E6B4EF1E-2D8B-44B3-BA41-744990CDE875@uzh.ch>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6B4EF1E-2D8B-44B3-BA41-744990CDE875@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <BD22E7ED-A213-44C2-8199-D69AA0544C92@ipjustice.org>

I share the concerns that ICANN's civil society engagement/outreach  
efforts seem to be:
   a) PR for ICANN, and
   b) attempts to manage civil society by encouraging as others have  
said "the 'right' kind of civil society groups' at ICANN (i.e. those  
who will not criticize ICANN and share *staff's* goals for the type  
of NGO's to become engaged or to listen to (see (a) above).

All of ICANN's 'outreach/engagement' efforts are top-down, and we  
hear about them in a press release after ICANN has made all  
invitations and arrangements.

We need a strategy to encourage ICANN to start including non- 
commercial users who have been thinking about these issues (many are  
in NCSG) and have contacts with these new groups in their plans for  
civil society outreach and engagement.

A formal (but friendly) letter to ICANN from NCSG is in order on this  
issue in my view.

Thanks,
Robin

On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:18 AM, William Drake wrote:

> Hi
>
> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Avri,
>>
>> Thanks for the udpate,
>>
>>
>>
>> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting  
>> for the write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.   
>> So I had not yet gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.
>>
>> maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?
>>
>> - 'doubling down on splintering'
>>
>> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co- 
>> volunteers objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I  
>> had proposed.  He not only wanted to keep those separate, he  
>> wanted to separate the discussion with NGOs into two groups:
>>
>> I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is  
>> happening already in his visit to Asia and in japan in particular  
>> (I think you already saw the message from Izumi in At-large list),  
>> the meeting are seen as PR and communication more than real  
>> engagement IMHO, but I will be glad to see my assumption  
>> contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the content of  
>> blog post about LA meeting.
>
> It's just so refreshing to have the Vice President of Business  
> Engagement in charge of defining civil society and which players  
> merit what kinds of inclusion.  So I guess "NGOs" means the paid  
> staff of NGOs, not their members and fellow travelers, who might  
> include (gasp) academics.
>>
>> for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in  
>> dubai and adis abeba?
>> the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries- 
>> registrars meeting in amsterdam?
>> also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users summit  
>> where they will all non-commercials without distinction.
>>
>>
>> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly  
>> smaller organizations
>> - Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic  
>> operations in the global public interest - the big organizations
>
> So the real interest is probably not "NGOs" generally, but rather  
> the "right kind of NGOs" that some ICANN vets have said were  
> supposed to have been the CS contingent all along?When oh when are  
> Oxfam et al going to call and say domain names are their priority now?
>
>>
>> yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why inviting  
>> "leaders".
>>
>> - As for 'leaders.'
>>
>> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my  
>> innate disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my  
>> pragmatic attitude in this conversation.
>>
>> I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to  
>> encourage its usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing such  
>> corporate culture to ICANN , that will be self-defeating.
>>
>>
>>  These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few  
>> other leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of  
>> conversations with lots of Non Commercials and other civil  
>> society, in this case, I was presenting an argument for why his  
>> roundtable series should extend to Non Commercial leaders.  If we  
>> want to present ideas for other events with other kinds of voices,  
>> we should develop specific proposals.
>>
>> ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.
>
> Ditto
>>
>>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get  
>> something opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high  
>> level event".  My personal suggestion that started the discussions  
>> was the simple proposition that he needed to do with Civil  
>> Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of leadership roundtable  
>> he is having with Business.
>>
>> yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then  
>> registrars, and probably with business but he dont divide them in  
>> sub-categories.
>>
>> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign,  
>> though I do support the idea of other types of campaign.
>> not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.
>>
>>
>> - On individuals not institutions.
>>
>> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads  
>> of other organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps  
>> if/when we get to academic, that can be expanded to other  
>> prominent members of Civil society who are not academic.
>
> or NGO staff??
>>
>> back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.
>>
>>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about  
>> individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10  
>> individuals he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting  
>> with the some of the individual people who hate ICANN would be a  
>> different sort of beast.  and perhaps this is what NCSG should  
>> work up a proposal on - something similar to what is done at ICANn  
>> meeting for the business community should be done for the civil  
>> society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in Nairobi  
>> at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.   
>> But that is something different than this, and for now, I am  
>> working on this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think  
>> we should present it.
>>
>> OK for the last sentence.
>>
>> - When and Where
>>
>> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places  
>> where these leaders may already be.
>
> Maybe he could lurk around outside Security Council and Human  
> Rights Council meetings with some 'join the new gTLD program'  
> pamphlets...
>
>> He is worried about the ability to actually pull these leaders to  
>> LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest possible  
>> events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva  
>> consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best  
>> opportunities for co-scheduling.  I am looking into other  
>> opportunities for the non-Ig NGO leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.   
>> We have not gotten down to specific invitees yet.
>>
>> - Topics
>>
>> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis  
>> (not at all a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing  
>> it is a Biz thing), the topics we discussed:
>>
>> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the  
>> roundtables with Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being  
>> talked about.  In terms of discussions with civil society  
>> organizations and academic, it would be ICANN's reputation.
>>
>> well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of  
>> processes , respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is  
>> not PR exercise because outsiders have really little trust on  
>> ICANN, we are the few believers and somehow trasher by ICANN itself.
>
> Oh the irony
>>
>>  I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's  
>> reputation especially among Civil society, I really do not think  
>> they know.  I think many think that what they do for ALAC is  
>> enough to make civil society happy.  I started my work on  
>> disabusing them of this notion.
>
> Perhaps we could organize a close encounter at the IGF?
>>
>> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that  
>> "minimal service" is enough.
>>
>> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale  
>> operational requirements
>>
>> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in  
>> the various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation  
>> can be facilitated
>>
>> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC  
>> where I volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization  
>> efforts and issue of institutional capture.
>>
>> I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate  
>> there too.
>
> We've been raising these in NCSG meetings with the board etc. for  
> years and no traction.  Something written would really help.
>>
>> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee  
>> yet, but wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more  
>> formal report of the meeting, I will share it.
>>
>> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as  
>> a representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to  
>> tell him what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision  
>> to try and do it by semi-private email instead of public assault.  
>> Sometimes I think public assault in the blogosphere etc is the way  
>> to go; in this case, I decided to try to quiet way.
>>
>>
>> that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)
>
> Si
>>
>>
>>
>> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have  
>> a Vice President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been  
>> encouraging Fadi to think about this.  We also discussed this gap  
>> during the phone call - I mentioned some of  our disappointment at  
>> the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc were totally ignored  
>> in their engagement plans.
>>
>> +1 and we need to keep pressure in that side,
>
> +2 BD
>>
>> Thanks again Avri,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>
>> > any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
>> > for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you  
>> used the term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high  
>> level event? I am not sure that only institutions and  
>> organizations are only the representative of civil society. I do  
>> think that you agree with me that many individuals  highly  
>> involved and being part of many communities like free software,  
>> FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those individuals  
>> are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS  
>> for example, that is probably totally different from the  
>> perspective of big non-commercial organisations or associations  
>> involved in developing world.
>> >
>> >
>> > Rafik
>> >
>> > ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some  
>> purpose called vena diagram :)
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/3ef4acb3/attachment-0001.html>


From avri  Mon Feb 18 22:24:35 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:24:35 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <BD22E7ED-A213-44C2-8199-D69AA0544C92@ipjustice.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6B4EF1E-2D8B-44B3-BA41-744990CDE875@uzh.ch>
	<BD22E7ED-A213-44C2-8199-D69AA0544C92@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <5FF18A7D-ABDD-4D19-BA73-24F542743A8C@acm.org>

Hi,

Such a letter would probably have the most punch coming form the NCSG-EC + Chair.

Vetting on NCSG-Discuss might be good too.

In the meantime, I will keep working on my meager personal efforts.

avri


On 18 Feb 2013, at 15:04, Robin Gross wrote:

> I share the concerns that ICANN's civil society engagement/outreach efforts seem to be:
>   a) PR for ICANN, and 
>   b) attempts to manage civil society by encouraging as others have said "the 'right' kind of civil society groups' at ICANN (i.e. those who will not criticize ICANN and share *staff's* goals for the type of NGO's to become engaged or to listen to (see (a) above).
> 
> All of ICANN's 'outreach/engagement' efforts are top-down, and we hear about them in a press release after ICANN has made all invitations and arrangements.
> 
> We need a strategy to encourage ICANN to start including non-commercial users who have been thinking about these issues (many are in NCSG) and have contacts with these new groups in their plans for civil society outreach and engagement.
> 
> A formal (but friendly) letter to ICANN from NCSG is in order on this issue in my view.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:18 AM, William Drake wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Avri,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the udpate,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting for the write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.  So I had not yet gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.
>>> 
>>> maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?   
>>> 
>>> - 'doubling down on splintering'
>>> 
>>> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co-volunteers objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I had proposed.  He not only wanted to keep those separate, he wanted to separate the discussion with NGOs into two groups:
>>> 
>>> I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is happening already in his visit to Asia and in japan in particular (I think you already saw the message from Izumi in At-large list), the meeting are seen as PR and communication more than real engagement IMHO, but I will be glad to see my assumption contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the content of blog post about LA meeting.
>> 
>> It's just so refreshing to have the Vice President of Business Engagement in charge of defining civil society and which players merit what kinds of inclusion.  So I guess "NGOs" means the paid staff of NGOs, not their members and fellow travelers, who might include (gasp) academics.  
>>> 
>>> for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in dubai and adis abeba?
>>> the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries-registrars meeting in amsterdam?
>>> also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users summit where they will all non-commercials without distinction.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly smaller organizations 
>>> - Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic operations in the global public interest - the big organizations
>> 
>> So the real interest is probably not "NGOs" generally, but rather the "right kind of NGOs" that some ICANN vets have said were supposed to have been the CS contingent all along?When oh when are Oxfam et al going to call and say domain names are their priority now?
>> 
>>> 
>>> yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why inviting "leaders".
>>> 
>>> - As for 'leaders.'
>>> 
>>> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my innate disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my pragmatic attitude in this conversation.
>>> 
>>> I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to encourage its usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing such corporate culture to ICANN , that will be self-defeating.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few other leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of conversations with lots of Non Commercials and other civil society, in this case, I was presenting an argument for why his roundtable series should extend to Non Commercial leaders.  If we want to present ideas for other events with other kinds of voices, we should develop specific proposals.
>>> 
>>> ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.
>> 
>> Ditto
>>>  
>>>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get something opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high level event".  My personal suggestion that started the discussions was the simple proposition that he needed to do with Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of leadership roundtable he is having with Business.
>>> 
>>> yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then registrars, and probably with business but he dont divide them in sub-categories.
>>>  
>>> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign, though I do support the idea of other types of campaign.
>>> not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.
>>>  
>>> 
>>> - On individuals not institutions.
>>> 
>>> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads of other organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps if/when we get to academic, that can be expanded to other prominent members of Civil society who are not academic.
>> 
>> or NGO staff??
>>> 
>>> back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.
>>>  
>>>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10 individuals he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting with the some of the individual people who hate ICANN would be a different sort of beast.  and perhaps this is what NCSG should work up a proposal on - something similar to what is done at ICANn meeting for the business community should be done for the civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.  But that is something different than this, and for now, I am working on this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think we should present it.
>>> 
>>> OK for the last sentence.
>>>  
>>> - When and Where
>>> 
>>> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places where these leaders may already be.  
>> 
>> Maybe he could lurk around outside Security Council and Human Rights Council meetings with some 'join the new gTLD program' pamphlets...
>> 
>>> He is worried about the ability to actually pull these leaders to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest possible events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best opportunities for co-scheduling.  I am looking into other opportunities for the non-Ig NGO leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.  We have not gotten down to specific invitees yet.
>>> 
>>> - Topics
>>> 
>>> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis (not at all a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing it is a Biz thing), the topics we discussed:
>>> 
>>> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the roundtables with Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being talked about.  In terms of discussions with civil society organizations and academic, it would be ICANN's reputation.
>>> 
>>> well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of processes , respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is not PR exercise because outsiders have really little trust on ICANN, we are the few believers and somehow trasher by ICANN itself.
>> 
>> Oh the irony
>>> 
>>>  I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's reputation especially among Civil society, I really do not think they know.  I think many think that what they do for ALAC is enough to make civil society happy.  I started my work on disabusing them of this notion.
>> 
>> Perhaps we could organize a close encounter at the IGF?
>>> 
>>> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that "minimal service" is enough.
>>>  
>>> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale operational requirements
>>> 
>>> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in the various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation can be facilitated
>>> 
>>> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC where I volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization efforts and issue of institutional capture.
>>> 
>>> I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate there too. 
>> 
>> We've been raising these in NCSG meetings with the board etc. for years and no traction.  Something written would really help.
>>> 
>>> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee yet, but wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more formal report of the meeting, I will share it.
>>> 
>>> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as a representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to tell him what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision to try and do it by semi-private email instead of public assault. Sometimes I think public assault in the blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to try to quiet way.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)
>> 
>> Si
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have a Vice President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been encouraging Fadi to think about this.  We also discussed this gap during the phone call - I mentioned some of  our disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc were totally ignored in their engagement plans.
>>> 
>>> +1 and we need to keep pressure in that side, 
>> 
>> +2 BD
>>> 
>>> Thanks again Avri,
>>> 
>>> Rafik
>>> 
>>> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>> 
>>> > any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
>>> > for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am not sure that only institutions and organizations are only the representative of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that many individuals  highly involved and being part of many communities like free software, FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS for example, that is probably totally different from the perspective of big non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Rafik
>>> >
>>> > ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose called vena diagram :)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From robin  Tue Feb 19 02:24:13 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:24:13 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
Message-ID: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>

Dear Participants at NCPH Meeting in LA at end of January:

The membership keeps asking for a report of this meeting from us.

The NCSG "discussion leaders" for each of the topics discussed has  
been asked to please propose a 1-paragraph (minimum) summary for each  
of the issues discussed in LA.

Attached is the final agenda with the names of NCSG participants who  
were discussion leaders at various points and from whom reports are  
requested from the membership.

Avri has built a wiki page for discussion leaders to post their  
summaries to:
   https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/NCPH+Meeting 
+with+ICANN+Senior+Staff+-+January+2013

So, folks who were in LA, please add your summary to the report to  
the membership asap.

Thank you,
Robin

?


IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/48ec2e4f/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 31744 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/48ec2e4f/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/48ec2e4f/attachment-0003.html>


From william.drake  Tue Feb 19 10:04:39 2013
From: william.drake (William Drake)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:04:39 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>

Hi Robin

Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?

Bill

On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>




From robin  Tue Feb 19 17:07:41 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:07:41 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
	<F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
Message-ID: <4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>

Yes, if you look at the entire document in the attachment, it includes both days discussions and the discussion leaders for each discussion over the two days. Not sure why you think this pertains to discussion with Fadi.

Thanks,
Robin

On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:04 AM, William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH> wrote:

> Hi Robin
> 
> Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> 
>> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>
> 
> 



From robin  Tue Feb 19 17:13:22 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:13:22 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
	<F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
	<4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <9F9099D6-8ECC-4613-9CDB-B0AE495EEBB2@ipjustice.org>

And if there are other discussions not detailed here, (like constituency discussions) just add them in to wiki that Avri built for us.  No restrictions should be inferred.  This is just to get us *started* with some kind of report.

Thanks,
Robin

On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:07 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Yes, if you look at the entire document in the attachment, it includes both days discussions and the discussion leaders for each discussion over the two days. Not sure why you think this pertains to discussion with Fadi.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:04 AM, William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Robin
>> 
>> Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>
>> 
>> 



From william.drake  Tue Feb 19 18:01:32 2013
From: william.drake (William Drake)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:01:32 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
	<F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
	<4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <9C2B16EB-8339-46CA-A0B3-BAB430D114F5@UZH.CH>

I did look at it.  As I said, it has a page on the meeting with Fadi, and a page on the three issue session.  Which constituted about 1/4 of the meeting.


On Feb 19, 2013, at 4:07 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> Yes, if you look at the entire document in the attachment, it includes both days discussions and the discussion leaders for each discussion over the two days. Not sure why you think this pertains to discussion with Fadi.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:04 AM, William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Robin
>> 
>> Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>
>> 
>> 




From avri  Tue Feb 19 18:17:44 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:17:44 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <9C2B16EB-8339-46CA-A0B3-BAB430D114F5@UZH.CH>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
	<F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
	<4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
	<9C2B16EB-8339-46CA-A0B3-BAB430D114F5@UZH.CH>
Message-ID: <83166776-A643-4820-89CF-77BBB92BD2D6@acm.org>


well then, please fix it.

thanks

avri

On 19 Feb 2013, at 11:01, William Drake wrote:

> I did look at it.  As I said, it has a page on the meeting with Fadi, and a page on the three issue session.  Which constituted about 1/4 of the meeting.
> 
> 
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 4:07 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> 
>> Yes, if you look at the entire document in the attachment, it includes both days discussions and the discussion leaders for each discussion over the two days. Not sure why you think this pertains to discussion with Fadi.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>> 
>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:04 AM, William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Robin
>>> 
>>> Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?
>>> 
>>> Bill
>>> 
>>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 




From robin  Tue Feb 19 18:36:50 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:36:50 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Reports needed from participants of NCPH Mtg in LA
In-Reply-To: <9C2B16EB-8339-46CA-A0B3-BAB430D114F5@UZH.CH>
References: <10D9FDBA-2037-4BCF-9747-C201C51F26CF@ipjustice.org>
	<F744D505-B4B1-4444-A257-223393ECC04A@UZH.CH>
	<4930454A-A578-4359-9ACB-B9D790EDEEA7@ipjustice.org>
	<9C2B16EB-8339-46CA-A0B3-BAB430D114F5@UZH.CH>
Message-ID: <D12CE8C9-9C56-4B64-94C2-16FD944CC267@ipjustice.org>

One more time:  And if there are other discussions not detailed here,  
(like constituency discussions) just add them in to wiki that Avri  
built for us.  No restrictions should be inferred.  This is just to  
get us *started* with some kind of report.

Thanks,
Robin


On Feb 19, 2013, at 8:01 AM, William Drake wrote:

> I did look at it.  As I said, it has a page on the meeting with  
> Fadi, and a page on the three issue session.  Which constituted  
> about 1/4 of the meeting.
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 4:07 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
>
>> Yes, if you look at the entire document in the attachment, it  
>> includes both days discussions and the discussion leaders for each  
>> discussion over the two days. Not sure why you think this pertains  
>> to discussion with Fadi.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 12:04 AM, William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Robin
>>>
>>> Any reason to limit it to the Fadi meeting and 3 issues  
>>> sessions?  The other day and half might be of interest too?
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:24 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> <Meeting with Fadi and Policy Mtgs with Staff - LA Mtg - DRAFT V.3>
>>>
>>>
>
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/f6cdc8e6/attachment.html>


From avri  Tue Feb 19 21:01:31 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:01:31 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues
	identified: annex statement
References: <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F127D0F7C@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <28A78AEE-1F75-4577-AF00-50DBE860B020@acm.org>


Hi,

We should probably look at the value of endorsing the NCUC stmt and Annex as NCSG.

I suggest we monitor the DISCUSS list and unless anyone there or anyone on this list has an objection to the work should submit a short statement that says something like:

---

The statements <ref1> and <ref2> has been reviewed by the NCSG membership on its DISCUSS list and by the NCSG Policy Committee. 

The NSCG endorses these comments.

signed 

Chair NCSG-PC - assuming we have elected her

--

avri
 

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Balleste, Roy" <rballeste at STU.EDU>
> Subject: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues identified: annex statement
> Date: 19 February 2013 12:33:55 EST
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Reply-To: "Balleste, Roy" <rballeste at STU.EDU>
> 
> Dear colleagues,
>  
> Please see the attached annex statement on privacy and data protection.  I will appreciate suggestions, changes, modifications, etc.  The privacy-data protection sub group of the ?thick? Whois Working Group will meet again tomorrow.  Tomorrow I will be submisting this Annex document as an individual (although I do not claim full credit for this document)pending endorsement by the NCUC (see attachments).  The thick? Whois WG is ready to move forward and this may be the last chance that we have to emphasize the challenges surrounding privacy and data protection.  This document, preferably, needs to be made available to the full WG by next week, Tuesday.
>  
>  
> Roy Balleste, J.S.D.
> Law Library Director
> Professor of Law
> St. Thomas University
> 16401 NW 37th Avenue
> Miami Gardens, FL 33054  USA
> 1-305-623-2341
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0005.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: schaar-to-cerf-12mar07-en.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 54106 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0003.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0006.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 20120926_letter_to_icann_en emphasized.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 97075 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0004.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0007.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: safe_harbor_fact_or_fiction.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 590842 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0005.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0008.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: data.protection.privacy.statement.2013.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 27470 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/b55ff7e6/attachment-0009.html>


From avri  Tue Feb 19 22:19:07 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:19:07 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Comment for Policy versus Implementation
Message-ID: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>

hi,

Late again, but at least there are 2 days, though I admit it still may not be enough time for the NCSG to approve this.  Needs to be submitted by 21 Feb midnight UTC.

I have drafted: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40929438

I am sure it still needs work, but that is the essential shape of what I can think to say.  I will make an edit pass through it for typos etc, and of course appreciate any help substantive or other that any want to offer.  

I will also be sending a version of this message to the Discuss list to give the NCSG membership a chance to comment.

Sorry to be running late, but i did gain 2 days on my previous attempts.  I guess that  is something.  I am getting better.

thanks

avri




From avri  Tue Feb 19 23:11:45 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:11:45 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Upcoming statements
Message-ID: <1FDD35E7-CF3E-4A19-B61D-FCB537D02A9D@acm.org>



I know I have not been elected as alternate anything yet , but, looking at:

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments-Current

I am wondering whether anyone else intends to volunteer for creating any other statements.

Or do we want to by-pass these issues?

avri


From robin  Wed Feb 20 00:19:35 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:35 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
In-Reply-To: <5FF18A7D-ABDD-4D19-BA73-24F542743A8C@acm.org>
References: <E840C18A-77A3-4DAE-B05B-707FB60EC7D8@ella.com>
	<DFDEF381-1121-4A10-A05F-2AE1CA01C335@acm.org>
	<1466B68F-F200-4B51-BE14-032A7C2C5AE6@uzh.ch>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013315D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<4FF6AF76-4FA4-4811-B047-74CB2C1C1B20@acm.org>
	<0BF5FAE1-BC8C-430A-AD94-1C6268D732D4@acm.org>
	<408814F5-7D76-497E-9666-4548224C86E8@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThngbrHR_E3M1tGTnp2w=UWFZbiR=dg30smxmPmC0nG=rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<078B33BC-2687-459C-B123-8E5ED86A79D9@acm.org>
	<CAH5sThnaj_9G5hsTuqVk3Kf-j14zc-D0CO6xH13fvUi=tMKE2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<E6B4EF1E-2D8B-44B3-BA41-744990CDE875@uzh.ch>
	<BD22E7ED-A213-44C2-8199-D69AA0544C92@ipjustice.org>
	<5FF18A7D-ABDD-4D19-BA73-24F542743A8C@acm.org>
Message-ID: <52FA3531-DD98-49A6-841D-5C7D6D3C0346@ipjustice.org>

Thanks, Avri. I've written to Klaus separately after hearing he  
volunteered to make the first draft of this letter on NCSG's call  
last week.  (Thanks, Klaus!)

So I will work with Klaus and the EC to get this letter started.

Best,
Robin

On Feb 18, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Such a letter would probably have the most punch coming form the  
> NCSG-EC + Chair.
>
> Vetting on NCSG-Discuss might be good too.
>
> In the meantime, I will keep working on my meager personal efforts.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 18 Feb 2013, at 15:04, Robin Gross wrote:
>
>> I share the concerns that ICANN's civil society engagement/ 
>> outreach efforts seem to be:
>>   a) PR for ICANN, and
>>   b) attempts to manage civil society by encouraging as others  
>> have said "the 'right' kind of civil society groups' at ICANN  
>> (i.e. those who will not criticize ICANN and share *staff's* goals  
>> for the type of NGO's to become engaged or to listen to (see (a)  
>> above).
>>
>> All of ICANN's 'outreach/engagement' efforts are top-down, and we  
>> hear about them in a press release after ICANN has made all  
>> invitations and arrangements.
>>
>> We need a strategy to encourage ICANN to start including non- 
>> commercial users who have been thinking about these issues (many  
>> are in NCSG) and have contacts with these new groups in their  
>> plans for civil society outreach and engagement.
>>
>> A formal (but friendly) letter to ICANN from NCSG is in order on  
>> this issue in my view.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:18 AM, William Drake wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Rafik Dammak  
>>> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Avri,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the udpate,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting  
>>>> for the write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send  
>>>> me.  So I had not yet gotten to writing anything up.  But since  
>>>> you ask.
>>>>
>>>> maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?
>>>>
>>>> - 'doubling down on splintering'
>>>>
>>>> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co- 
>>>> volunteers objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I  
>>>> had proposed.  He not only wanted to keep those separate, he  
>>>> wanted to separate the discussion with NGOs into two groups:
>>>>
>>>> I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is  
>>>> happening already in his visit to Asia and in japan in  
>>>> particular (I think you already saw the message from Izumi in At- 
>>>> large list), the meeting are seen as PR and communication more  
>>>> than real engagement IMHO, but I will be glad to see my  
>>>> assumption contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the  
>>>> content of blog post about LA meeting.
>>>
>>> It's just so refreshing to have the Vice President of Business  
>>> Engagement in charge of defining civil society and which players  
>>> merit what kinds of inclusion.  So I guess "NGOs" means the paid  
>>> staff of NGOs, not their members and fellow travelers, who might  
>>> include (gasp) academics.
>>>>
>>>> for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in  
>>>> dubai and adis abeba?
>>>> the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries- 
>>>> registrars meeting in amsterdam?
>>>> also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users  
>>>> summit where they will all non-commercials without distinction.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance -  
>>>> mostly smaller organizations
>>>> - Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic  
>>>> operations in the global public interest - the big organizations
>>>
>>> So the real interest is probably not "NGOs" generally, but rather  
>>> the "right kind of NGOs" that some ICANN vets have said were  
>>> supposed to have been the CS contingent all along?When oh when  
>>> are Oxfam et al going to call and say domain names are their  
>>> priority now?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why  
>>>> inviting "leaders".
>>>>
>>>> - As for 'leaders.'
>>>>
>>>> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my  
>>>> innate disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my  
>>>> pragmatic attitude in this conversation.
>>>>
>>>> I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to  
>>>> encourage its usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing  
>>>> such corporate culture to ICANN , that will be self-defeating.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few  
>>>> other leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of  
>>>> conversations with lots of Non Commercials and other civil  
>>>> society, in this case, I was presenting an argument for why his  
>>>> roundtable series should extend to Non Commercial leaders.  If  
>>>> we want to present ideas for other events with other kinds of  
>>>> voices, we should develop specific proposals.
>>>>
>>>> ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.
>>>
>>> Ditto
>>>>
>>>>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get  
>>>> something opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high  
>>>> level event".  My personal suggestion that started the  
>>>> discussions was the simple proposition that he needed to do with  
>>>> Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of leadership  
>>>> roundtable he is having with Business.
>>>>
>>>> yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then  
>>>> registrars, and probably with business but he dont divide them  
>>>> in sub-categories.
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign,  
>>>> though I do support the idea of other types of campaign.
>>>> not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - On individuals not institutions.
>>>>
>>>> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads  
>>>> of other organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.   
>>>> Perhaps if/when we get to academic, that can be expanded to  
>>>> other prominent members of Civil society who are not academic.
>>>
>>> or NGO staff??
>>>>
>>>> back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.
>>>>
>>>>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about  
>>>> individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10  
>>>> individuals he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting  
>>>> with the some of the individual people who hate ICANN would be a  
>>>> different sort of beast.  and perhaps this is what NCSG should  
>>>> work up a proposal on - something similar to what is done at  
>>>> ICANn meeting for the business community should be done for the  
>>>> civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in  
>>>> Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for  
>>>> Durban.  But that is something different than this, and for now,  
>>>> I am working on this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I  
>>>> think we should present it.
>>>>
>>>> OK for the last sentence.
>>>>
>>>> - When and Where
>>>>
>>>> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and  
>>>> places where these leaders may already be.
>>>
>>> Maybe he could lurk around outside Security Council and Human  
>>> Rights Council meetings with some 'join the new gTLD program'  
>>> pamphlets...
>>>
>>>> He is worried about the ability to actually pull these leaders  
>>>> to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest possible  
>>>> events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva  
>>>> consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best  
>>>> opportunities for co-scheduling.  I am looking into other  
>>>> opportunities for the non-Ig NGO leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.   
>>>> We have not gotten down to specific invitees yet.
>>>>
>>>> - Topics
>>>>
>>>> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis  
>>>> (not at all a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing  
>>>> it is a Biz thing), the topics we discussed:
>>>>
>>>> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the  
>>>> roundtables with Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being  
>>>> talked about.  In terms of discussions with civil society  
>>>> organizations and academic, it would be ICANN's reputation.
>>>>
>>>> well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of  
>>>> processes , respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is  
>>>> not PR exercise because outsiders have really little trust on  
>>>> ICANN, we are the few believers and somehow trasher by ICANN  
>>>> itself.
>>>
>>> Oh the irony
>>>>
>>>>  I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's  
>>>> reputation especially among Civil society, I really do not think  
>>>> they know.  I think many think that what they do for ALAC is  
>>>> enough to make civil society happy.  I started my work on  
>>>> disabusing them of this notion.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we could organize a close encounter at the IGF?
>>>>
>>>> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that  
>>>> "minimal service" is enough.
>>>>
>>>> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale  
>>>> operational requirements
>>>>
>>>> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in  
>>>> the various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation  
>>>> can be facilitated
>>>>
>>>> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC  
>>>> where I volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization  
>>>> efforts and issue of institutional capture.
>>>>
>>>> I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate  
>>>> there too.
>>>
>>> We've been raising these in NCSG meetings with the board etc. for  
>>> years and no traction.  Something written would really help.
>>>>
>>>> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee  
>>>> yet, but wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more  
>>>> formal report of the meeting, I will share it.
>>>>
>>>> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables  
>>>> as a representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume  
>>>> to tell him what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical  
>>>> decision to try and do it by semi-private email instead of  
>>>> public assault. Sometimes I think public assault in the  
>>>> blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to try  
>>>> to quiet way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)
>>>
>>> Si
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not  
>>>> have a Vice President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been  
>>>> encouraging Fadi to think about this.  We also discussed this  
>>>> gap during the phone call - I mentioned some of  our  
>>>> disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc  
>>>> were totally ignored in their engagement plans.
>>>>
>>>> +1 and we need to keep pressure in that side,
>>>
>>> +2 BD
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again Avri,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
>>>>> for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you  
>>>>> used the term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of  
>>>>> high level event? I am not sure that only institutions and  
>>>>> organizations are only the representative of civil society. I  
>>>>> do think that you agree with me that many individuals  highly  
>>>>> involved and being part of many communities like free software,  
>>>>> FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those  
>>>>> individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the  
>>>>> "centralisation" of DNS for example, that is probably totally  
>>>>> different from the perspective of big non-commercial  
>>>>> organisations or associations involved in developing world.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for  
>>>>> some purpose called vena diagram :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/69209b89/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Wed Feb 20 02:10:33 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:10:33 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] spreadsheet to organize logistical details and discussion
	topics, outputs for NCSG participation in Beijing
Message-ID: <776024F0-FFE1-432A-8D17-DFD61B4E7F20@ipjustice.org>

All,

As you're aware, we've begun preparation for our participation at the  
Beijing ICANN Meeting in April.  That means organizing many different  
meetings over the course of the week and keeping track of all the  
discussion topics and logistical issues.  I've created a Google Docs  
spreadsheet to keep track of our participation in Beijing in one place.

NCSG Meetings in Beijing:
   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc? 
key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dG11eV9fZWJMbUdEQW9PRnY4cnFNWVE&usp=sharing

The schedule is very very DRAFT.  Especially times for the NCSG-EC  
and NCSG-PC.

I've tried to list a tentative / proposed time for the discussion and  
possible discussion topics and meeting outputs.  Please comment, add,  
or subtract as desired.

Hopefully we can keep track of the logistics for our week's main NCSG  
meetings in this document.  And the spreadsheet can evolve and change  
over the coming months to suit the membership's interest and  
concerns.  (And be used as template for organizing our participation  
in Durban and beyond.]

I included the possibility of an outreach event to local civil  
society in Beijing as we sometimes do, but given all the other  
activities this week, we may want to skip it in Beijing.

Comments, thoughts, suggestions are all welcome.  We will come into  
Beijing prepared and ready to roll!

Thanks!
Robin



IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/3502100b/attachment.html>


From avri  Wed Feb 20 15:41:31 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 08:41:31 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues
	identified: annex statement
References: <12DFCE58-063F-4690-A004-D7A6F93C8CF3@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4CD5ACAC-50BB-4991-A9A5-5A48CA85F74F@acm.org>


I support giving this NCSG endorsement.

avri

Begin forwarded message:

> From: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues identified: annex statement
> Date: 20 February 2013 07:32:01 EST
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Reply-To: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
> 
> Hi Roy
> 
> On Feb 20, 2013, at 8:03 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
> 
>>> The privacy-data protection sub group of the 'thick' Whois
>>> Working Group will meet again tomorrow. Tomorrow I will be
>>> submisting this Annex document as an individual (although I do not
>>> claim full credit for this document) pending endorsement by the NCUC
> 
> It having received nothing but favorable responses from members, you can indeed submit this as an NCUC-endorsed statement, and we can tweet and post it to the website as well.  Thanks much for your great work on this, much appreciated.  And per Avri's and Ed's messages, if the NCSG PC would like to give it an SG endorsement as well, all the better!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bill
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130220/59d1be64/attachment.html>


From avri  Wed Feb 20 16:14:42 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:14:42 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Comment for Policy versus Implementation
In-Reply-To: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>
References: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>
Message-ID: <DD2EEAE8-B1DB-4ABC-9481-7D5716563AE7@acm.org>

Hi,

So far no comments on this in DISCUSS
or here either.

I will be asking this group to give me approval to send it as an NCSG comment.  Please let me know in next 24 hours if you can support that.  

Please send/do edits.

And please feel free to advise that I should send it as a private statement.

thanks

avri


On 19 Feb 2013, at 15:19, Avri Doria wrote:

> hi,
> 
> Late again, but at least there are 2 days, though I admit it still may not be enough time for the NCSG to approve this.  Needs to be submitted by 21 Feb midnight UTC.
> 
> I have drafted: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40929438
> 
> I am sure it still needs work, but that is the essential shape of what I can think to say.  I will make an edit pass through it for typos etc, and of course appreciate any help substantive or other that any want to offer.  
> 
> I will also be sending a version of this message to the Discuss list to give the NCSG membership a chance to comment.
> 
> Sorry to be running late, but i did gain 2 days on my previous attempts.  I guess that  is something.  I am getting better.
> 
> thanks
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 




From wolfgang.kleinwaechter  Wed Feb 20 18:01:24 2013
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:01:24 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10
 issuesidentified: annex statement
References: <12DFCE58-063F-4690-A004-D7A6F93C8CF3@uzh.ch>
	<4CD5ACAC-50BB-4991-A9A5-5A48CA85F74F@acm.org>
Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331614@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Bill
 
full support from my side.-
 
wolfgang

________________________________

Fra: pc-ncsg-bounces at ipjustice.org p? vegne af Avri Doria
Sendt: on 20-02-2013 14:41
Til: NCSG-Policy Policy
Emne: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issuesidentified: annex statement



I support giving this NCSG endorsement. 

avri


Begin forwarded message:


	From: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
	
	Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues identified: annex statement
	
	Date: 20 February 2013 07:32:01 EST
	
	To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
	
	Reply-To: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
	

	Hi Roy
	
	
	On Feb 20, 2013, at 8:03 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:


			The privacy-data protection sub group of the 'thick' Whois
			Working Group will meet again tomorrow. Tomorrow I will be
			submisting this Annex document as an individual (although I do not
			claim full credit for this document) pending endorsement by the NCUC


	It having received nothing but favorable responses from members, you can indeed submit this as an NCUC-endorsed statement, and we can tweet and post it to the website as well.  Thanks much for your great work on this, much appreciated.  And per Avri's and Ed's messages, if the NCSG PC would like to give it an SG endorsement as well, all the better!

	Cheers,

	Bill






From robin  Wed Feb 20 18:24:49 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 08:24:49 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Comment for Policy versus Implementation
In-Reply-To: <DD2EEAE8-B1DB-4ABC-9481-7D5716563AE7@acm.org>
References: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>
	<DD2EEAE8-B1DB-4ABC-9481-7D5716563AE7@acm.org>
Message-ID: <DF0B261A-830B-4940-AAE0-96FB9D8090F8@ipjustice.org>

Thanks, Avri.  This is an excellent comment and provides food for  
thought (not something we can say about most ICANN documents!)

I support NCSG submitting / endorsing this important comment.

Thanks again,
Robin

On Feb 20, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So far no comments on this in DISCUSS
> or here either.
>
> I will be asking this group to give me approval to send it as an  
> NCSG comment.  Please let me know in next 24 hours if you can  
> support that.
>
> Please send/do edits.
>
> And please feel free to advise that I should send it as a private  
> statement.
>
> thanks
>
> avri
>
>
> On 19 Feb 2013, at 15:19, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> hi,
>>
>> Late again, but at least there are 2 days, though I admit it still  
>> may not be enough time for the NCSG to approve this.  Needs to be  
>> submitted by 21 Feb midnight UTC.
>>
>> I have drafted: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action? 
>> pageId=40929438
>>
>> I am sure it still needs work, but that is the essential shape of  
>> what I can think to say.  I will make an edit pass through it for  
>> typos etc, and of course appreciate any help substantive or other  
>> that any want to offer.
>>
>> I will also be sending a version of this message to the Discuss  
>> list to give the NCSG membership a chance to comment.
>>
>> Sorry to be running late, but i did gain 2 days on my previous  
>> attempts.  I guess that  is something.  I am getting better.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130220/86bc14e6/attachment-0001.html>


From Mary.Wong  Wed Feb 20 20:42:27 2013
From: Mary.Wong (Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:42:27 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues
 identified: annex statement
In-Reply-To: <4CD5ACAC-50BB-4991-A9A5-5A48CA85F74F@acm.org>
References: <12DFCE58-063F-4690-A004-D7A6F93C8CF3@uzh.ch>
	<4CD5ACAC-50BB-4991-A9A5-5A48CA85F74F@acm.org>
Message-ID: <5124D2C30200005B000A257E@smtp.law.unh.edu>


Happy to agree.


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
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:  
Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> 

To: 
NCSG-Policy Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 

Date:  
2/20/2013 8:41 AM 

Subject:  
[PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues identified: annex statement 



I support giving this NCSG endorsement. 



avri



Begin forwarded message: 





From: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>

Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues identified: annex statement

Date: 20 February 2013 07:32:01 EST

To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Reply-To: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>



Hi Roy


On Feb 20, 2013, at 8:03 AM, Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote: 







The privacy-data protection sub group of the 'thick' Whois
Working Group will meet again tomorrow. Tomorrow I will be
submisting this Annex document as an individual (although I do not
claim full credit for this document) pending endorsement by the NCUC   


It having received nothing but favorable responses from members, you can indeed submit this as an NCUC-endorsed statement, and we can tweet and post it to the website as well.  Thanks much for your great work on this, much appreciated.  And per Avri's and Ed's messages, if the NCSG PC would like to give it an SG endorsement as well, all the better! 



Cheers, 



Bill 


 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130220/37346450/attachment.html>


From robin  Wed Feb 20 23:23:35 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:23:35 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues
	identified: annex statement
In-Reply-To: <5124D2C30200005B000A257E@smtp.law.unh.edu>
References: <12DFCE58-063F-4690-A004-D7A6F93C8CF3@uzh.ch>
	<4CD5ACAC-50BB-4991-A9A5-5A48CA85F74F@acm.org>
	<5124D2C30200005B000A257E@smtp.law.unh.edu>
Message-ID: <585CAB9D-4AF1-4982-B3C2-2C9A5D93EECB@ipjustice.org>

Thanks, all.  I also agree to endorse the statement.

Great work to Roy, Amr, and the others who helped with the drafting  
and commenting!

Best,
Robin



On Feb 20, 2013, at 10:42 AM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu> wrote:

> Happy to agree.
>
>
> Mary W S Wong
> Professor of Law
> Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> USA
> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu
> 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:
> Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
> To:
> NCSG-Policy Policy <PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
> Date:
> 2/20/2013 8:41 AM
> Subject:
> [PC-NCSG] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues  
> identified: annex statement
>
> I support giving this NCSG endorsement.
>
> avri
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Please review: Whois 10 issues  
>> identified: annex statement
>> Date: 20 February 2013 07:32:01 EST
>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> Reply-To: William Drake <william.drake at UZH.CH>
>>
>> Hi Roy
>>
>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 8:03 AM, Tapani Tarvainen  
>> <ncuc at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO> wrote:
>>
>>>> The privacy-data protection sub group of the 'thick' Whois
>>>> Working Group will meet again tomorrow. Tomorrow I will be
>>>> submisting this Annex document as an individual (although I do not
>>>> claim full credit for this document) pending endorsement by the  
>>>> NCUC
>>
>> It having received nothing but favorable responses from members,  
>> you can indeed submit this as an NCUC-endorsed statement, and we  
>> can tweet and post it to the website as well.  Thanks much for  
>> your great work on this, much appreciated.  And per Avri's and  
>> Ed's messages, if the NCSG PC would like to give it an SG  
>> endorsement as well, all the better!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130220/7f775fff/attachment.html>


From avri  Thu Feb 21 18:43:55 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:43:55 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] SCI Fwd: [] Revised Suspension - Termination of a PDP
References: <CD4BA38B.E905%julie.hedlund@icann.org>
Message-ID: <84D37268-7BED-4DEB-AF2D-E19EF92697B1@acm.org>

Hi,

This is nearly done and will be sent to the council in the near future.
it has gone through a lot of editing.

Any comments?

avri

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund at icann.org>
> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Revised Suspension - Termination of a PDP
> Date: 21 February 2013 10:12:27 EST
> To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org>
> 
> Dear SCI members,
> 
> Per our discussion on yesterday's call, attached for your review (in Word and PDF) is the revised text of the section on termination and suspension of a PDP with all previous edits accepted.  I have included, as the only redline, the one change suggested by Anne in the meeting.  The revised document is attached and also posted on the 06 March meeting page under the heading "For Review" at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/06+March+2013. 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Julie
> 
> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/c01c895c/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Suspension - Termination Rev 20 February 2013.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 51835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/c01c895c/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/c01c895c/attachment-0004.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Suspension - Termination Rev 20 February 2013.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 29696 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/c01c895c/attachment-0001.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/c01c895c/attachment-0005.html>


From robin  Thu Feb 21 20:39:48 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 10:39:48 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] NCSG Policy Committee Elected Chair & Alternate Chair:
	Wendy / Avri
Message-ID: <98F44507-DAC9-4F4C-9641-8ADC52E7D8BD@ipjustice.org>

All,

Good News!  The Policy Committee of the Non-Commercial Stakeholder  
Group has elected a Chair and an Alternate Chair to assist in the  
organization and engagement of policy development of noncommercial  
users in the GNSO-ICANN.

I am happy to announce the NCSG-PC has elected:
   Wendy Seltzer as Chair of the NCSG-PC
   Avri Doria as Alternate Chair of the NCSG-PC

Giant thanks to both Wendy and Avri for under-taking these additional  
responsibilities (see below) as members of the NCSG-PC!  The NCSG  
Charter requires the NCSG-PC to elect a Chair on an annual basis, and  
both roles were uncontested and unanimously approved by the voting  
committee members.  (The role had been empty before).

We can be sure that noncommercial interests will be much better  
represented in ICANN policy development with Wendy and Avri as our PC  
Chair and Alternate Chair.

Best,
Robin


________________________________________________________________

Duties of the Role of the Chair & Alternate Chair of the NCSG Policy  
Committee:

1.  Comment Periods
Keep track of ICANN public comment periods and assist with drafting  
and filing of member comments in coordination with NCSG-PC members,  
NCSG working group representatives and other NCSG members and  
constituencies.  This means encouraging both individual NCSG members  
to file individual comments and also the drafting and filing of  
official NCSG statements.  For NCSG statements, NCSG-PC Chair will  
call for "rough consensus" of NCSG-PC members regarding any  
particular statement and determine the reaching of rough consensus as  
per NCSG Charter.

2. Other NCSG Statements
Organize the drafting of other policy statements made in NCSG's name  
including the specific policy issue summaries requested by CEO (aka  
"policy cheat sheets").  NCSG-Chair does not have to personally "hold  
the drafting pen" on every statement, but rather, the Chair will  
recruit the person responsible for holding the drafting pen on any  
particular statement.

3.  Working Groups
Keep track of GNSO and other ICANN policy working groups and  
encourage participation from NCSG members in those policy working  
groups.  Endeavor to find adequate NCSG member participation and  
other noncommercial expertise in the policy working groups of concern  
to NCSG members.

4.  NCSG Policy Calls
Participate in the monthly NCSG Policy calls and send out a brief  
"voting guide" after the call to NCSG-PC members to summarize  
discussions on how NCSG GNSO Councilors intend to vote on motions  
pending before the next GNSO Council Meeting.






IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/51976e98/attachment.html>


From avri  Thu Feb 21 20:52:14 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:52:14 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [] NCSG Policy Committee Elected Chair & Alternate
	Chair: Wendy / Avri
In-Reply-To: <98F44507-DAC9-4F4C-9641-8ADC52E7D8BD@ipjustice.org>
References: <98F44507-DAC9-4F4C-9641-8ADC52E7D8BD@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <7720893B-E597-49DC-8044-D1DEF1EC8851@acm.org>

Hi,

Thanks.

I hope to live up to the task of annoying people (I figure that is an alternate chair's role & responsibility) for the rest of the year to maximize the participation of NCSG members in the policy tasks.

We need your help:

- participating in working groups
- commenting on output documents
- commenting on proposed input documents
- and participating in any of a number of policy efforts as a team member


avri


On 21 Feb 2013, at 13:39, Robin Gross wrote:

> All,
> 
> Good News!  The Policy Committee of the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group has elected a Chair and an Alternate Chair to assist in the organization and engagement of policy development of noncommercial users in the GNSO-ICANN.
> 
> I am happy to announce the NCSG-PC has elected:
>   Wendy Seltzer as Chair of the NCSG-PC
>   Avri Doria as Alternate Chair of the NCSG-PC
> 
> Giant thanks to both Wendy and Avri for under-taking these additional responsibilities (see below) as members of the NCSG-PC!  The NCSG Charter requires the NCSG-PC to elect a Chair on an annual basis, and both roles were uncontested and unanimously approved by the voting committee members.  (The role had been empty before).
> 
> We can be sure that noncommercial interests will be much better represented in ICANN policy development with Wendy and Avri as our PC Chair and Alternate Chair. 
> 
> Best,
> Robin
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> 
> Duties of the Role of the Chair & Alternate Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee:
> 
> 1.  Comment Periods
> Keep track of ICANN public comment periods and assist with drafting and filing of member comments in coordination with NCSG-PC members, NCSG working group representatives and other NCSG members and constituencies.  This means encouraging both individual NCSG members to file individual comments and also the drafting and filing of official NCSG statements.  For NCSG statements, NCSG-PC Chair will call for "rough consensus" of NCSG-PC members regarding any particular statement and determine the reaching of rough consensus as per NCSG Charter.
> 
> 2. Other NCSG Statements
> Organize the drafting of other policy statements made in NCSG's name including the specific policy issue summaries requested by CEO (aka "policy cheat sheets").  NCSG-Chair does not have to personally "hold the drafting pen" on every statement, but rather, the Chair will recruit the person responsible for holding the drafting pen on any particular statement.
> 
> 3.  Working Groups
> Keep track of GNSO and other ICANN policy working groups and encourage participation from NCSG members in those policy working groups.  Endeavor to find adequate NCSG member participation and other noncommercial expertise in the policy working groups of concern to NCSG members.
> 
> 4.  NCSG Policy Calls
> Participate in the monthly NCSG Policy calls and send out a brief "voting guide" after the call to NCSG-PC members to summarize discussions on how NCSG GNSO Councilors intend to vote on motions pending before the next GNSO Council Meeting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg




From robin  Thu Feb 21 21:27:15 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:27:15 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG letter to ICANN RE: outreach / engagement plans
References: <F87523F6-4E15-4819-806A-D76236C7F7D4@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <C42AAD24-93F2-41CE-8F06-99CDC405E8CD@ipjustice.org>

Hi Klaus,

Below is my email with thoughts on the letter to ICANN.  Please let  
me know what you think when you have a moment.

Thanks again for your help with this letter!

Best,
Robin

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> Date: February 18, 2013 3:27:41 PM PST
> To: Klaus Stoll <klaus.stoll at gkpfoundation.org>
> Subject: NCSG letter to ICANN RE: outreach / engagement plans
>
> Klaus,
>
> I listened to the NCSG Policy Meeting call recording from last week.
>
> Thanks for agreeing to make the first draft of the NCSG letter to  
> ICANN regarding ICANN's outreach / engagement plans.
>
> Based on my understanding the main points are below.
>
> Concerned about ICANN's outreach / engagements:
>
> 1.  Business focused - little concern for non-commercial users
>
> 2.  Not bottom-up (staff-driven)
>
> Bottom Line:  ICANN needs to include NCSG participants in their  
> plans for outreach/engagement of non-commercial interests.
>
> Is there any other main point or sub-points we want to make in this  
> letter?
>
> Any other thoughts or suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130221/05413b66/attachment.html>


From avri  Thu Feb 21 21:40:55 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:40:55 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Comment for Policy versus Implementation
In-Reply-To: <DF0B261A-830B-4940-AAE0-96FB9D8090F8@ipjustice.org>
References: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>
	<DD2EEAE8-B1DB-4ABC-9481-7D5716563AE7@acm.org>
	<DF0B261A-830B-4940-AAE0-96FB9D8090F8@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <19C7A12D-8B7A-4AFD-BA3F-2A48007B0C70@acm.org>

Hi,

At this point I am inclined to send this as a NCSG position.

It has been in review 2 days.  
Has gotten few comments, but no comments against.

I have about 3 hours left until the deadline.

Does anyone object?

thanks


On 20 Feb 2013, at 11:24, Robin Gross wrote:

> Thanks, Avri.  This is an excellent comment and provides food for thought (not something we can say about most ICANN documents!)
> 
> I support NCSG submitting / endorsing this important comment.
> 
> Thanks again,
> Robin
> 
> On Feb 20, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> So far no comments on this in DISCUSS
>> or here either.
>> 
>> I will be asking this group to give me approval to send it as an NCSG comment.  Please let me know in next 24 hours if you can support that.  
>> 
>> Please send/do edits.
>> 
>> And please feel free to advise that I should send it as a private statement.
>> 
>> thanks
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> On 19 Feb 2013, at 15:19, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>>> hi,
>>> 
>>> Late again, but at least there are 2 days, though I admit it still may not be enough time for the NCSG to approve this.  Needs to be submitted by 21 Feb midnight UTC.
>>> 
>>> I have drafted: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40929438
>>> 
>>> I am sure it still needs work, but that is the essential shape of what I can think to say.  I will make an edit pass through it for typos etc, and of course appreciate any help substantive or other that any want to offer.  
>>> 
>>> I will also be sending a version of this message to the Discuss list to give the NCSG membership a chance to comment.
>>> 
>>> Sorry to be running late, but i did gain 2 days on my previous attempts.  I guess that  is something.  I am getting better.
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 




From rafik.dammak  Fri Feb 22 13:03:55 2013
From: rafik.dammak (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 20:03:55 +0900
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] spreadsheet to organize logistical details
 and discussion topics, outputs for NCSG participation in Beijing
In-Reply-To: <776024F0-FFE1-432A-8D17-DFD61B4E7F20@ipjustice.org>
References: <776024F0-FFE1-432A-8D17-DFD61B4E7F20@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThn09M65z8ung5Gu3ZkRwnsvoTieyKKLg4=sO=UiuvNrnA@mail.gmail.com>

thanks Robin, can gnso councillors update us about the draft schedule for
beijing meeting, for example is ncsg-alac meeting overlapping with gnso
council public meeting or not?

Rafik


2013/2/20 Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>

>  All,
>
> As you're aware, we've begun preparation for our participation at the
> Beijing ICANN Meeting in April.  That means organizing many different
> meetings over the course of the week and keeping track of all the
> discussion topics and logistical issues.  I've created a Google Docs
> spreadsheet to keep track of our participation in Beijing in one place.
>
> NCSG Meetings in Beijing:
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dG11eV9fZWJMbUdEQW9PRnY4cnFNWVE&usp=sharing
>
> The schedule is very very DRAFT.  Especially times for the NCSG-EC and
> NCSG-PC.
>
> I've tried to list a tentative / proposed time for the discussion and
> possible discussion topics and meeting outputs.  Please comment, add, or
> subtract as desired.
>
> Hopefully we can keep track of the logistics for our week's main NCSG
> meetings in this document.  And the spreadsheet can evolve and change over
> the coming months to suit the membership's interest and concerns.  (And be
> used as template for organizing our participation in Durban and beyond.]
>
> I included the possibility of an outreach event to local civil society in
> Beijing as we sometimes do, but given all the other activities this week,
> we may want to skip it in Beijing.
>
>  Comments, thoughts, suggestions are all welcome.  We will come into
> Beijing prepared and ready to roll!
>
> Thanks!
> Robin
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EC-NCSG mailing list
> EC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/ec-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130222/0fb47d89/attachment.html>


From robin  Fri Feb 22 15:48:40 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:48:40 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] spreadsheet to organize logistical details
	and discussion topics, outputs for NCSG participation in Beijing
In-Reply-To: <CAH5sThn09M65z8ung5Gu3ZkRwnsvoTieyKKLg4=sO=UiuvNrnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <776024F0-FFE1-432A-8D17-DFD61B4E7F20@ipjustice.org>
	<CAH5sThn09M65z8ung5Gu3ZkRwnsvoTieyKKLg4=sO=UiuvNrnA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7B5FB428-1A9C-4261-9B62-078990BB648E@ipjustice.org>

Hi Rafik,

Attached is the only draft schedule that ICANN has provided so far  
(just over a week ago) used together with the Beijing mtg schedule on  
the website.  We built our meeting times around ICANN's draft  
schedule.  It is tentative and may change depending on changes to the  
ICANN schedule.

Thanks,
Robin

?

On Feb 22, 2013, at 3:03 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:

> thanks Robin, can gnso councillors update us about the draft  
> schedule for beijing meeting, for example is ncsg-alac meeting  
> overlapping with gnso council public meeting or not?
>
> Rafik
>
>
> 2013/2/20 Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> All,
>
> As you're aware, we've begun preparation for our participation at  
> the Beijing ICANN Meeting in April.  That means organizing many  
> different meetings over the course of the week and keeping track of  
> all the discussion topics and logistical issues.  I've created a  
> Google Docs spreadsheet to keep track of our participation in  
> Beijing in one place.
>
> NCSG Meetings in Beijing:
>   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc? 
> key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dG11eV9fZWJMbUdEQW9PRnY4cnFNWVE&usp=sharing
>
> The schedule is very very DRAFT.  Especially times for the NCSG-EC  
> and NCSG-PC.
>
> I've tried to list a tentative / proposed time for the discussion  
> and possible discussion topics and meeting outputs.  Please  
> comment, add, or subtract as desired.
>
> Hopefully we can keep track of the logistics for our week's main  
> NCSG meetings in this document.  And the spreadsheet can evolve and  
> change over the coming months to suit the membership's interest and  
> concerns.  (And be used as template for organizing our  
> participation in Durban and beyond.]
>
> I included the possibility of an outreach event to local civil  
> society in Beijing as we sometimes do, but given all the other  
> activities this week, we may want to skip it in Beijing.
>
> Comments, thoughts, suggestions are all welcome.  We will come into  
> Beijing prepared and ready to roll!
>
> Thanks!
> Robin
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EC-NCSG mailing list
> EC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/ec-ncsg
>
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130222/c633df85/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Beijing46-BlockSched-HotTopics-Feb13[2].pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 67394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130222/c633df85/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130222/c633df85/attachment-0003.html>


From avri  Sat Feb 23 16:11:05 2013
From: avri (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 09:11:05 -0500
Subject: [PC-NCSG] NPOC and the NCSG-PC
In-Reply-To: <CANgs+Stse8sgTQXhF_Ji2LfOS0DxUXKUTovHca_LF2stq6ZXmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61C559D4-1B25-4174-8192-38E289F32335@acm.org>
	<CANgs+Stse8sgTQXhF_Ji2LfOS0DxUXKUTovHca_LF2stq6ZXmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FA5AA3AC-73DD-49EB-843E-7322816BC0D1@acm.org>

<I have added GNSO Secretariat and the NCSG-Polciy Committee (NCSG-PC) to the cc>

Hi,

I am very glad to welcome Rudi and Poncelet into the NCSG-PC Committee.  

I think it is good that NPOC will become active participants in the PC.  Not only do we need the viewpoints, we need the workers.  Between Public Comments and Working Groups and special requests etc, there is a lot of work to share.

I ask the GNSO Secretariat to get them added to the lists.

I want to take this opportunity to remind your members (please forward this on) that we have a NCSG open policy meeting each month.  This is usually held a few days before the monthly GNSO Council meeting and is open to all NCSG members and their employees.

Thanks

Avri
Alternate Chair
NCSG-PC

On 23 Feb 2013, at 07:20, Alain Berranger wrote:

> Hi Avri,
> 
> Thanks for asking.
> At NPOC monthly call last Tuesday, we designated Rudi Vansnick (ISOC Belgium )and Poncelet Ileleji (YMCA The Gambia) to be appointed as NPOC reps to NCSG-PC, in replacement of Lori Schulman and Judy Branzelle. This wil be the start of NPOC's real involvement in the process.
> 
> Rudi is an ICANN veteran. Poncelet, I'm sure, will appreciate any mentoring NCSG member can provide.
> 
> Looking forward to our work together. Cheers, Alain




From robin  Sat Feb 23 18:31:06 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 08:31:06 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] NPOC and the NCSG-PC
In-Reply-To: <CANgs+Stse8sgTQXhF_Ji2LfOS0DxUXKUTovHca_LF2stq6ZXmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61C559D4-1B25-4174-8192-38E289F32335@acm.org>
	<CANgs+Stse8sgTQXhF_Ji2LfOS0DxUXKUTovHca_LF2stq6ZXmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F286F43E-DCEF-47DB-8B56-383D6A302A1D@ipjustice.org>

Thanks, Alain.  It is great to hear that NPOC has appointed Rudi and  
Poncelet to be the new NPOC reps on the NCSG-PC.

I will get them on the mailing list and listed on the website at once.

I look forward to working with Rudi and Poncelet more closely in the  
future on NCSG's policy matters.

Thanks again,
Robin

On Feb 23, 2013, at 4:20 AM, Alain Berranger wrote:

> Hi Avri,
>
> Thanks for asking.
> At NPOC monthly call last Tuesday, we designated Rudi Vansnick  
> (ISOC Belgium )and Poncelet Ileleji (YMCA The Gambia) to be  
> appointed as NPOC reps to NCSG-PC, in replacement of Lori Schulman  
> and Judy Branzelle. This wil be the start of NPOC's real  
> involvement in the process.
>
> Rudi is an ICANN veteran. Poncelet, I'm sure, will appreciate any  
> mentoring NCSG member can provide.
>
> Looking forward to our work together. Cheers, Alain
>
> On Thursday, February 21, 2013, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As the first thing I do as the newly elected Alternate Chair of the  
> NCSG-PC I want to ask whether there is anything we can do to help  
> NPOC get involved in the work of the NCSG-Policy Committee.
>
> Thanks
>
> avri
>
>
>
> -- 
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,  
> www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,  
> www.gkpfoundation.org
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
>
>
> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALIT?
> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est ? l?usage exclusif du  
> destinataire ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le pr?sent message  
> sans en ?tre le destinataire, ou l?employ?(e) ou la personne  
> responsable de le remettre au destinataire, est par les pr?sentes  
> avis?e qu?il lui est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le  
> distribuer, de le modifier ou de le reproduire, en tout ou en  
> partie . Si le destinataire ne peut ?tre joint ou si ce document  
> vous a ?t? communiqu? par erreur, veuillez nous en informer sur le  
> champ  et d?truire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de  
> votre coop?ration.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the  
> exclusive use of the addressee. Please note that, should this  
> message be read by anyone other than the addressee, his or her  
> employee or the person responsible for forwarding it to the  
> addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose, distribute,  
> modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or in  
> part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received  
> this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this  
> e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130223/57d9e6b5/attachment.html>


From robin  Tue Feb 26 01:52:30 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:52:30 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] In search of European & national data protection
	officials for ICANN Whois Expert Working Group
Message-ID: <4C32C283-6849-4013-B22A-7BFB85035FA6@ipjustice.org>

All:

I've started to compile a list of the various EU and national data  
protection officers we have approached to participate in this ICANN  
Whois Expert Working Group:
   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc? 
key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dGNyZ2dySGZTNlgzcGNHbm9aSUZuMlE&usp=sharing

In most cases, I just had the general published email address for the  
national office so don't know how much we can expect to hear back  
from some of these privacy officials without more specific contact  
information (and additional pressure from their constituents to  
participate).  So if anyone has any additional contact info (and  
knows anyone in these offices and can send them a note to encourage  
their participation) if would be most helpful.  This group is  
beginning its work right now, so we don't have much time to get  
anyone with privacy on the group.

Thanks,
Robin


IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130225/7843df05/attachment.html>


From joy  Tue Feb 26 03:38:23 2013
From: joy (joy)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:38:23 +1300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] Comment for Policy versus Implementation
In-Reply-To: <19C7A12D-8B7A-4AFD-BA3F-2A48007B0C70@acm.org>
References: <688C534A-0D28-4D2A-8575-0A25F7D40A31@acm.org>
	<DD2EEAE8-B1DB-4ABC-9481-7D5716563AE7@acm.org>
	<DF0B261A-830B-4940-AAE0-96FB9D8090F8@ipjustice.org>
	<19C7A12D-8B7A-4AFD-BA3F-2A48007B0C70@acm.org>
Message-ID: <512C120F.1060201@apc.org>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Avri, thanks so much for doing this comment, which is excellent.

Joy

On 22/02/2013 8:40 a.m., Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At this point I am inclined to send this as a NCSG position.
> 
> It has been in review 2 days. Has gotten few comments, but no
> comments against.
> 
> I have about 3 hours left until the deadline.
> 
> Does anyone object?
> 
> thanks
> 
> 
> On 20 Feb 2013, at 11:24, Robin Gross wrote:
> 
>> Thanks, Avri.  This is an excellent comment and provides food for
>> thought (not something we can say about most ICANN documents!)
>> 
>> I support NCSG submitting / endorsing this important comment.
>> 
>> Thanks again, Robin
>> 
>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> So far no comments on this in DISCUSS or here either.
>>> 
>>> I will be asking this group to give me approval to send it as
>>> an NCSG comment.  Please let me know in next 24 hours if you
>>> can support that.
>>> 
>>> Please send/do edits.
>>> 
>>> And please feel free to advise that I should send it as a
>>> private statement.
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 19 Feb 2013, at 15:19, Avri Doria wrote:
>>> 
>>>> hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Late again, but at least there are 2 days, though I admit it
>>>> still may not be enough time for the NCSG to approve this.
>>>> Needs to be submitted by 21 Feb midnight UTC.
>>>> 
>>>> I have drafted:
>>>> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40929438
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
I am sure it still needs work, but that is the essential shape of what I
can think to say.  I will make an edit pass through it for typos etc,
and of course appreciate any help substantive or other that any want to
offer.
>>>> 
>>>> I will also be sending a version of this message to the
>>>> Discuss list to give the NCSG membership a chance to
>>>> comment.
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry to be running late, but i did gain 2 days on my
>>>> previous attempts.  I guess that  is something.  I am getting
>>>> better.
>>>> 
>>>> thanks
>>>> 
>>>> avri
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG
>>>> mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
>>> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street,
>> San Francisco, CA  94117  USA p: +1-415-553-6261    f:
>> +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e:
>> robin at ipjustice.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRLBIPAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bq1uoIALoqTiPHhpryU8/OqwqvDBHO
Y85DT16XArZE+5LdAoUEJ89roQrxLYNQKezUXOi0JrM3Tg1qKMCkDau35dCXnbls
H+A79sWkZsmp0/nWVE6OSyU2djPlCEbiH+KlvuRpACgDZsd/rum3FIFaS4WceZBP
RuxDR4fkIdx9fLN2bwDsWdzk6j9O0Y8k/ubfPYbz0Jw/RI0zk4BcxythrOsPe60d
sdh3EmNZ5MwhOcLTnUOpiLC4i5Q1WwFQ0AbnZJrgMQr9kI3fS/olR61TO7EaOv7Y
hEDgzvv0dqrPRO/nGezrcEgMdiktiBa8TZH6e3y+/JMJfhXx9zO8M19PEkdMZyk=
=hbBV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From joy  Tue Feb 26 03:53:10 2013
From: joy (joy)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:53:10 +1300
Subject: [PC-NCSG] revised draft NCSG statement on staff's strawman
	proposal
In-Reply-To: <F569E28F-BD1F-42A7-9330-05E3B7FFF1A6@ipjustice.org>
References: <50E9F7870200005B0009F09E@smtp.law.unh.edu>
	<933829169.240305.1357546107509.JavaMail.mail@webmail12>
	<50EA9103.2090501@gmx.net>
	<F569E28F-BD1F-42A7-9330-05E3B7FFF1A6@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <512C1586.7040701@apc.org>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

thanks Robin and all those who contrbuted to this input, which was
excellent.
Joy

On 15/01/2013 9:35 a.m., Robin Gross wrote:
> Thanks all for the comments and support.  I've added language about
> the territoriality point that Konstantinos and Mary make and
> attached is the final draft, which I'll now submit to the comment
> forum.  The trademark lobby is getting comments in now too...
> 
> Thanks again for all the suggestions to this text.  The comment
> period closes tomorrow, but then the reply comment period will be
> open until 5 Feb.
> 
> Best, Robin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 7, 2013, at 1:10 AM, Norbert Klein wrote:
> 
>> On 7 1.2013 15:08, konstantinos at komaitis.org wrote:
>>> Yes - this is a great statement. Perhaps it would be valuable
>>> to include a bit on nominative use (see Toyota Motor Sales,
>>> U.S.A., Inc. v. Farzad Tabari, et al. No. 07-55344 (9th Cir.
>>> July 8, 2010), Judge Kozinski gave a great analysis, I had
>>> blogged about it here:
>>> http://www.komaitis.org/1/post/2010/07/the-lessons-the-trademark-community-should-learn-from-judge-kozinskis-ruling-on-nominative-use.html).
>>> Also, on the issue of the GPML that is being sneaked in as
>>> blocking, I have written a bit on my book as to how it changes
>>> the face of trademark law - both in terms of territoriality as
>>> Mary suggests as well as on the basis of its philosophical
>>> foundations.
>>> 
>>> Hope this helps.
>>> 
>>> KK
>>> 
>> Thanks, Konstantinos, it really does.
>> 
>> for sharing and interpreting the US Ninth Circuit ruling by
>> Judge Kozinski. As a person not having been professionally
>> educated in law, I often fail to understand some arguments
>> presented in legal language. Maybe a similar situation prevents
>> also others and the public from more clearly resisting the trend
>> to increase trademark protection. But the text you refer to is so
>> clear ? common sense and legal at the same time. That is why I
>> appreciate your presentation, saying:
>> 
>> ?The ICANN community should really pay attention to this ruling 
>> and should learn from the excellent reasoning of Judge Kozinski. 
>> This decision is really a victory for many legitimate domain
>> name holders who lose their domain names...?
>> 
>> 
>> I even want to quote here some more in full and highlight from
>> what is under the URL you gave, in the hope that we all feel
>> encouraged to state again what is important ? and what is legal,
>> according to the ruling by the Judge Kozinski:
>> 
>> ?Further, the Ninth Circuit upheld the importance of the First 
>> Amendment in the context of trademark law stating that ?Speakers 
>> are under no obligation to provide a disclaimer as a condition
>> for engaging in truthful, non-misleading speech?. Judge Kozinski,
>> even asserted that thousands of sites make ?nominative use? and, 
>> contrary to the way consumers are portrayed under ICANN?s 
>> trademark policies, in reality consumers are both sophisticated 
>> and not easily mislead. On the other hand, a number of sites
>> make nominative use of trademarks in their domains but are not 
>> sponsored or endorsed by the trademark holder: You can preen
>> about your Mercedes at mercedesforum.com and mercedestalk.net,
>> read the latest about your double-skim-no-whip latte at
>> starbucksgossip.com and find out what goodies the world?s
>> greatest electronics store has on sale this week at
>> fryselectronics-ads.com. Consumers who use the internet for
>> shopping are generally quite sophisticated about such matters and
>> won?t be fooled into thinking that the prestigious German car
>> manufacturer sells boots at mercedesboots.com, or homes at
>> mercedeshomes.com, or that comcastsucks.org is sponsored or
>> endorsed by the TV cable company just because the string of
>> letters making up its trademark appears in the domain?.?
>> 
>> ?It is the wholesale prohibition of nominative use in domain
>> names that would be unfair. It would be unfair to merchants
>> seeking to communicate the nature of the service or product
>> offered at their sites. And it would be unfair to consumers, who
>> would be deprived of an increasingly important means of receiving
>> such information. As noted, this would have serious First
>> Amendment implications. The only winners would be companies like
>> Toyota, which would acquire greater control over the markets for
>> goods and services related to their trademarked brands, to the
>> detriment of competition and consumers.?
>> 
>> Thanks, of course, also to all others who have contributed to
>> the response to the Strawman Proposal.
>> 
>> 
>> Norbert Klein _______________________________________________ 
>> PC-NCSG mailing list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org> 
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San
> Francisco, CA  94117  USA p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451 
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org 
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ PC-NCSG mailing
> list PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org 
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRLBWGAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqKJYH/0ka75VJmGXaoT8T4HRHakiO
Qz57IXyHF4GqHTBV5ntFp3gLGQ2VmPp/3z9vv/kPMqg+e3q17XTHhgQQMEHl58Qp
9Sg+GlP284qOFJq2UDstHxs1KY3oPPDj0kA8yTFT7+os5LIl9fJzJAQK4UagAibL
jTaSBO/m8BOQ9JaqbxJBuEJO5hAvJdiSZubADN4G2hJdIqQ6U1VnaMU+cxdGETlW
527ZmVioRHLtiKiN6RwHYmjkQUdhNDbsARVzUoh3u2BLNunJDnHu1vuKL4pJ4iZd
NhySwkaIBSIzfRpdlmV13gJMQt73p8lsHOUvNitcP/H89DjoiprcVAqkGVDXHF4=
=FNbi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From rudi.vansnick  Tue Feb 26 11:05:00 2013
From: rudi.vansnick (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:05:00 +0100
Subject: [PC-NCSG] In search of European & national data protection
	officials for ICANN Whois Expert Working Group
In-Reply-To: <4C32C283-6849-4013-B22A-7BFB85035FA6@ipjustice.org>
References: <4C32C283-6849-4013-B22A-7BFB85035FA6@ipjustice.org>
Message-ID: <BAAB8740-DCEC-43D0-B9E5-5931345A0B27@isoc.be>

Dear Robin,

A small comment on the google doc : New Zealand is not Europe.

Furthermore I can (try to ) contact Peter Hustinx, the data privacy specialist at EU level.

Kind regards,

Rudi Vansnick
President - CEO			             Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16
rudi.vansnick at isoc.be		       Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32
Dendermondesteenweg 143		   B-9070 Destelbergen
=.=.=.=.=.=.==.= Internet Society Belgium  =.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=
www.internetsociety.be	      "The Internet is for everyone"

Op 26-feb-2013, om 00:52 heeft Robin Gross het volgende geschreven:

> All:
> 
> I've started to compile a list of the various EU and national data protection officers we have approached to participate in this ICANN Whois Expert Working Group:
>   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dGNyZ2dySGZTNlgzcGNHbm9aSUZuMlE&usp=sharing
> 
> In most cases, I just had the general published email address for the national office so don't know how much we can expect to hear back from some of these privacy officials without more specific contact information (and additional pressure from their constituents to participate).  So if anyone has any additional contact info (and knows anyone in these offices and can send them a note to encourage their participation) if would be most helpful.  This group is beginning its work right now, so we don't have much time to get anyone with privacy on the group.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130226/c34434be/attachment-0001.html>


From robin  Wed Feb 27 01:03:36 2013
From: robin (Robin Gross)
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:03:36 -0800
Subject: [PC-NCSG] In search of European & national data protection
	officials for ICANN Whois Expert Working Group
In-Reply-To: <BAAB8740-DCEC-43D0-B9E5-5931345A0B27@isoc.be>
References: <4C32C283-6849-4013-B22A-7BFB85035FA6@ipjustice.org>
	<BAAB8740-DCEC-43D0-B9E5-5931345A0B27@isoc.be>
Message-ID: <D7881937-D599-44FE-A184-FF12FA14F058@ipjustice.org>

Thanks, Rudi! If you could follow-up with Peter Hustinx that would be  
great.  < peter.hustinx at edps.europa.eu >

And we have been reaching out to national privacy commissioners  
outside of Europe as well, like New Zealand and Australia that I've  
reached out to.  There is already a good Canadian privacy authority  
on the EWG fortunately with Stephanie Perrin in the group.

It has been extremely difficult to get participation or interest from  
these national privacy commissioners.  (I've contacted nearly 20!).   
They usually say "Article 29 handles that so we don't."  BUT, Article  
29 is not participating in this group or following this debate, so we  
need for someone else to pick up the banner or to convince Article 29  
that it needs to engage.

Thanks for any assistance you can provide in recruiting some privacy  
officials for this group!

Best,
Robin

On Feb 26, 2013, at 1:05 AM, Rudi Vansnick wrote:

> Dear Robin,
>
> A small comment on the google doc : New Zealand is not Europe.
>
> Furthermore I can (try to ) contact Peter Hustinx, the data privacy  
> specialist at EU level.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Rudi Vansnick
> President - CEO			             Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16
> rudi.vansnick at isoc.be		       Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32
> Dendermondesteenweg 143		   B-9070 Destelbergen
> =.=.=.=.=.=.==.= Internet Society Belgium  =.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=
> www.internetsociety.be	      "The Internet is for everyone"
>
> Op 26-feb-2013, om 00:52 heeft Robin Gross het volgende geschreven:
>
>> All:
>>
>> I've started to compile a list of the various EU and national data  
>> protection officers we have approached to participate in this  
>> ICANN Whois Expert Working Group:
>>   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc? 
>> key=0AmHFgvYjF_e4dGNyZ2dySGZTNlgzcGNHbm9aSUZuMlE&usp=sharing
>>
>> In most cases, I just had the general published email address for  
>> the national office so don't know how much we can expect to hear  
>> back from some of these privacy officials without more specific  
>> contact information (and additional pressure from their  
>> constituents to participate).  So if anyone has any additional  
>> contact info (and knows anyone in these offices and can send them  
>> a note to encourage their participation) if would be most  
>> helpful.  This group is beginning its work right now, so we don't  
>> have much time to get anyone with privacy on the group.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130226/89bacfef/attachment.html>