From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Tue Oct 1 18:14:08 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 11:14:08 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter Message-ID: I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. Farzaneh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Tue Oct 1 18:48:32 2019 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:48:32 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] one on one with Goran Message-ID: <87ba4779-0227-7d92-383f-86122de8f31d@mail.utoronto.ca> I have my one on 14 with Goran tomorrow. I am late in sending these questions out for approcal, they were due yesterday. I have discussed with Bruna, that is it. Let me know if you have any reactions, I am sending very shortly. cheers Steph -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Questions for Goran NCSG oct 2.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16667 bytes Desc: Questions for Goran NCSG oct 2.docx URL: From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com Tue Oct 1 18:51:00 2019 From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 12:51:00 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. Best, Mart?n > On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: > > I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. > > > Farzaneh > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 02:28:04 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 08:28:04 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, bringing this topic to PC again as we need drafter and working the NCSG response to the proposed framework. Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Rafik Dammak Date: mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 09:05 Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest To: NCSG Hi, the details about public consultation below. I created a google doc so we can start the drafting for a NCSG Comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nZJ91SSW55Isl2iBAEASopfYnWcsgsBcXdB5hUUjNdI/edit. you can listen to webinar recordings here https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit . Best, Rafik >From 18 September ? 18 October 2019, a community consultation is taking place on the global public interest framework proposed by the ICANN Board. In reviewing the proposal, the ICANN Board is asking the ICANN community to consider the following questions for input to the ICANN Board: 1. What are your thoughts on the proposed framework approach? Do you have any suggestions for how it could be improved? 2. What are your thoughts on the proposed approach for decisions in the ICANN ecosystem to be accompanied by a consideration of their impact on the global public interest (as well as an explanation regarding what is meant by the GPI in the specific case)? 3. How do you see this working for the Supporting Organization (SO), Advisory Committee (AC), constituency, group, review team, or cross-community working group (CCWG) to which you are contributing? The global public interest is central to many of ICANN?s primary governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the globalpublic interest. This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper [r20.rs6.net] . Community feedback is welcome by *Friday, 18 October 2019 via email at **gpitoolkit at icann.org *. After the community consultation, there will be a public session at ICANN66, followed by a Public Comment proceeding. Le mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 08:53, Elsa S a ?crit : > Thanks for sharing Milton! > > ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context basis > given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this month. > > Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I?ve seen, has been pushing > for not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to actively > work on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally biased way. > > I?m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation phase > (even though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase instead), > but would also invite that we all have a discussion about the proposed way > forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively. > > Best, > > Elsa > ? > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L > wrote: > >> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service broadcasting >> and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik Chin: >> >> >> >> ?The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the Public >> Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions without >> definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ?PI?, either. >> This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to interpret >> ?PI? in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights. Chin, Y.C >> 2012. >> >> >> >> Food for thought >> >> >> >> Dr. Milton L Mueller >> >> School of Public Policy >> >> Georgia Institute of Technology >> >> >> > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 18:49:02 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 15:49:02 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent wrote: > If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. > > Best, > Mart?n > >> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: >> >> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >> >> Farzaneh >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 19:31:02 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 16:31:02 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] one on one with Goran In-Reply-To: References: <87ba4779-0227-7d92-383f-86122de8f31d@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: Taking this back to the Policy Committee list, where the thread started- I do not understand the surprise about this dinner. NCSG members have previously been briefed on this invitation. Is it actually a self-serving request to be added to the guest list? If so, please say as much. Thank you. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 21:49, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > These area excellent points Farzi, thanks. ANswers in line: > > On 2019-10-01 15:28, farzaneh badii wrote: > >> Hi Stephanie >> >> Thanks a lot for putting this together. I cc'd the list. >> >> The first question is an actual comment. So he has invited some NCSG members to dinner? Or is this the usual dinner invitation? And who would you like to take with you to this dinner if you could take other members? > > He has asked me to find 10 random folks. working on it, assume councillors and constituency heads, but also want new people. Thoughts welcome. > >> The second question, you are asking for a research librarian for the community. This should have been in form of additional budget request and I don't think anything can be done about it now. It's simply too late and the CEO doesn't have a pot of money to give to noncommercials to have a research librarian. This again is not a question, it's an ask. I don't think there would be any problem with if we suggest this as an ABR and promote it and get support from other community groups (though I am dubious about its effectiveness, since if we don't have many people active, why would they want to use a research libraria?) > > This is a staffing nudge, not an ABR. They need one, they are a grown up org and they have info needs. > >> The third question is again another ask for a budget, and this time its reallocation.I see that in this request, you mention that CSG was disinterested in meeting with "us". And then there was a concession? Would be glad to know more about this if you could share the details. You are asking for another day to be added to Cancun for NCSG to meet internally. I don't have an issue with that but I am wondering if the CEO will even entertain your request if you don't say the objectives of this one day meeting with NCSG. > > Well our partners there do not think it is worth their time and effort to meet with us in an intercessional. SO they proposed a one day addon. I think we need, as an SG, to start thinking about what our role is, how are we structured, does it make sense today, etc. Money is going to be sucked into the deficit if we don't use it, I want it. > >> I'd like to ask the CEO, and we have been asking this before, why some important call for comments from the community are published on blogs and not on public comment page? Can that be fixed? >> >> Are you going to discuss his blog about ICANN's carbon foot print? >> >> Could you also please raise the point that we are unclear about the nature of evolving ICANN's MSM process? Brian Cute (if I am not mistaken) was appointed by the Board or the CEO, and this whole initiative was created in a top-down manner I believe. How do they want to actually evolve the MSM when the process of evolving it is a top down process? > > I will raise both points, but if I put it in his briefing note, which is restricted to three points, it will be like waving a red flag in front of a bull. He thinks he is being transparent. > > I hope that answers your questions and thanks for engaging on this, much appreciated. > >> >> >> Farzaneh >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:48 AM Stephanie Perrin wrote: >> >>> I have my one on 14 with Goran tomorrow. I am late in sending these questions out for approcal, they were due yesterday. I have discussed with Bruna, that is it. Let me know if you have any reactions, I am sending very shortly. >>> >>> cheers Steph >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 19:32:33 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 16:32:33 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] one on one with Goran In-Reply-To: <87ba4779-0227-7d92-383f-86122de8f31d@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <87ba4779-0227-7d92-383f-86122de8f31d@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: Thanks for your work here, Stephanie - greatly appreciated and excellent questions. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:48, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > I have my one on 14 with Goran tomorrow. I am late in sending these questions out for approcal, they were due yesterday. I have discussed with Bruna, that is it. Let me know if you have any reactions, I am sending very shortly. > > cheers Steph -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arsenebaguma at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 20:58:57 2019 From: arsenebaguma at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne_Tungali?=) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 18:58:57 +0100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to support! On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. > > Ayden > > > ??????? Original Message ??????? > On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < > mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: > > If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let > you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved > in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. > > Best, > Mart?n > > On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: > > I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors > have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have > raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I > ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna > take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is > already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team > from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. > > > Farzaneh > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 21:09:15 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 14:09:15 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: That would be great. Thanks Martin. On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 11:51 AM Martin Pablo Silva Valent < mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: > If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let > you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved > in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. > > Best, > Mart?n > > On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: > > I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors > have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have > raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I > ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna > take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is > already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team > from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. > > > Farzaneh > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > > -- Farzaneh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 21:10:45 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:10:45 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. ?Ayden On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali wrote: > I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to support! > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > >> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >> >> Ayden >> >> ??????? Original Message ??????? >> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent wrote: >> >>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>> >>> Best, >>> Mart?n >>> >>>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: >>>> >>>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>>> >>>> Farzaneh >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dgdorothydg at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 22:20:53 2019 From: dgdorothydg at gmail.com (dorothy g) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 19:20:53 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. I am getting very confused. I will not comment on the comment on pressure. best regards Dorothy On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is > not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need > to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, > until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. > > ?Ayden > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali > wrote: > > I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to > support! > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > >> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >> >> Ayden >> >> >> ??????? Original Message ??????? >> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < >> mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and >> let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not >> involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >> >> Best, >> Mart?n >> >> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: >> >> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors >> have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have >> raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I >> ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna >> take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is >> already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team >> from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >> >> >> Farzaneh >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- Dorothy Gordon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 22:27:53 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 19:27:53 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hello Dorothy, I apologise for the confusion. You are right here. Anyone can contribute to the work, but final decisions should be made by the PC. I did not mean to suggest otherwise. However, as Farzi is not a member of the PC, her support of a proposal is not necessary for it to be the adopted proposal. On an unrelated note, I would like to see the PC adopt an ethics policy. I think one is necessary. Best wishes, Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:20, dorothy g wrote: > Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. I am getting very confused. > I will not comment on the comment on pressure. > > best regards > Dorothy > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > >> With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. >> >> ?Ayden >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali wrote: >> >>> I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to support! >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >>>> >>>> Ayden >>>> >>>> ??????? Original Message ??????? >>>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent wrote: >>>> >>>>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Mart?n >>>>> >>>>>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>>>>> >>>>>> Farzaneh >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > -- > Dorothy Gordon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 22:39:47 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 15:39:47 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Well, Martin proposed I work on it in the shadow and he can represent us on the DT in council. Since the proposal was about me being responsible for something (i.e. working on accuracy) then I guess I need to have a say in the proposal. Since it is about me. Unless you just don't want me to work on this which you can raise here and PC members can discuss. Farzaneh On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:28 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > Hello Dorothy, I apologise for the confusion. You are right here. Anyone > can contribute to the work, but final decisions should be made by the PC. I > did not mean to suggest otherwise. However, as Farzi is not a member of the > PC, her support of a proposal is not necessary for it to be the adopted > proposal. On an unrelated note, I would like to see the PC adopt an ethics > policy. I think one is necessary. > > Best wishes, Ayden > > > ??????? Original Message ??????? > On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:20, dorothy g > wrote: > > Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought > anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final > decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's > comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. > I am getting very confused. > I will not comment on the comment on pressure. > > best regards > Dorothy > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline > wrote: > >> With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is >> not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need >> to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, >> until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. >> >> ?Ayden >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali >> wrote: >> >> I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to >> support! >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: >> >>> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >>> >>> Ayden >>> >>> >>> ??????? Original Message ??????? >>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < >>> mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and >>> let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not >>> involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>> >>> Best, >>> Mart?n >>> >>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii >>> wrote: >>> >>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors >>> have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have >>> raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I >>> ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna >>> take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is >>> already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team >>> from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>> >>> >>> Farzaneh >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > > > -- > Dorothy Gordon > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Wed Oct 2 22:42:45 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 19:42:45 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: You may certainly offer your input on our archived mailing list, prefacing your comment with the notation that you are an observer. However, I do not personally consider it appropriate for you to be developing our policy positions "in the shadow", as you put it. There should be sunlight. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:39, farzaneh badii wrote: > Well, Martin proposed I work on it in the shadow and he can represent us on the DT in council. Since the proposal was about me being responsible for something (i.e. working on accuracy) then I guess I need to have a say in the proposal. Since it is about me. Unless you just don't want me to work on this which you can raise here and PC members can discuss. > > Farzaneh > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:28 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > >> Hello Dorothy, I apologise for the confusion. You are right here. Anyone can contribute to the work, but final decisions should be made by the PC. I did not mean to suggest otherwise. However, as Farzi is not a member of the PC, her support of a proposal is not necessary for it to be the adopted proposal. On an unrelated note, I would like to see the PC adopt an ethics policy. I think one is necessary. >> >> Best wishes, Ayden >> >> ??????? Original Message ??????? >> On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:20, dorothy g wrote: >> >>> Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. I am getting very confused. >>> I will not comment on the comment on pressure. >>> >>> best regards >>> Dorothy >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: >>> >>>> With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. >>>> >>>> ?Ayden >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to support! >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ayden >>>>>> >>>>>> ??????? Original Message ??????? >>>>>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Mart?n >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Farzaneh >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >>> -- >>> Dorothy Gordon >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 22:45:58 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 15:45:58 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Now that is a totally different point you are raising. What Martin meant was that I do the big portion of the work and support him in his work on accuracy. That's what shadow meant I believe. Not to work behind the doors in the shadow :))) Farzaneh On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:42 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > You may certainly offer your input on our archived mailing list, prefacing > your comment with the notation that you are an observer. However, I do not > personally consider it appropriate for you to be developing our policy > positions "in the shadow", as you put it. There should be sunlight. > > Ayden > > > ??????? Original Message ??????? > On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:39, farzaneh badii < > farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, Martin proposed I work on it in the shadow and he can represent us > on the DT in council. Since the proposal was about me being responsible for > something (i.e. working on accuracy) then I guess I need to have a say in > the proposal. Since it is about me. Unless you just don't want me to work > on this which you can raise here and PC members can discuss. > > > > > Farzaneh > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:28 PM Ayden F?rdeline > wrote: > >> Hello Dorothy, I apologise for the confusion. You are right here. Anyone >> can contribute to the work, but final decisions should be made by the PC. I >> did not mean to suggest otherwise. However, as Farzi is not a member of the >> PC, her support of a proposal is not necessary for it to be the adopted >> proposal. On an unrelated note, I would like to see the PC adopt an ethics >> policy. I think one is necessary. >> >> Best wishes, Ayden >> >> >> ??????? Original Message ??????? >> On Wednesday, 2 October 2019 21:20, dorothy g >> wrote: >> >> Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought >> anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final >> decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's >> comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. >> I am getting very confused. >> I will not comment on the comment on pressure. >> >> best regards >> Dorothy >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline >> wrote: >> >>> With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is >>> not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need >>> to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, >>> until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. >>> >>> ?Ayden >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali >>> wrote: >>> >>> I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to >>> support! >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >>>> >>>> Ayden >>>> >>>> >>>> ??????? Original Message ??????? >>>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < >>>> mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and >>>> let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not >>>> involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Mart?n >>>> >>>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors >>>> have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have >>>> raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I >>>> ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna >>>> take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is >>>> already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team >>>> from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>>> >>>> >>>> Farzaneh >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >> >> >> -- >> Dorothy Gordon >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tatiana.tropina at gmail.com Wed Oct 2 22:58:00 2019 From: tatiana.tropina at gmail.com (Tatiana Tropina) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 21:58:00 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Martin, all, if Martin can be a part of this team, it would be super great. I can offer my help if there is any need for it in fine-tuning the input, having a fresh eye, etc -- I can't deal with this fully, as I am still dealing with the consequences of my sudden "change jobs, cities and countries in 5 weeks" life turn, so for the next few weeks I am dealing only with what I have now, mainly the Council and EPDP legal team work without taking anything new. Sorry for this, I will be able to take more in a 2-3 weeks. Martin, thank you for volunteering, no matter what the outcome of the following discussion on this list is. Cheers, Tanya On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: > If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and let > you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not involved > in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. > > Best, > Mart?n > > On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii wrote: > > I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors > have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have > raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I > ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna > take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is > already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team > from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. > > > Farzaneh > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Oct 3 02:27:33 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:27:33 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Response to Goran's accuracy letter In-Reply-To: References: <5FEC9CFA-66D6-4D78-90CA-505A6D126A61@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Dorothy, yes your understanding is accurate, observers are welcome to participate in the discussion but as you noted only PC member can participate in the decision-making, as indicated in 2.5.6 in NCSG charter "Any observer to the NCSG PC will have full participation rights except will not be counted in any consensus process or vote." you are able to participate in the discussion. Best, Rafik Le jeu. 3 oct. 2019 ? 04:21, dorothy g a ?crit : > Dear all, I really need some clarification on how we work. I thought > anyone could contribute to the work of the policy committee but the final > decisions would be taken by the member of the said committee. Does Ayden's > comment mean that only policy committee members should work on the issues. > I am getting very confused. > I will not comment on the comment on pressure. > > best regards > Dorothy > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:10 PM Ayden F?rdeline > wrote: > >> With respect, Farzaneh?s support of the approach is not required. She is >> not currently a member of the Policy committee; she is an observer. We need >> to be careful not to be pressured by any forces, internal or external, >> until we ask ourselves why the strong and sudden interest in an issue. >> >> ?Ayden >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 19:58, Ars?ne Tungali >> wrote: >> >> I think Martin's suggested approach can work if Farzi is willing to >> support! >> >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 4:49 PM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: >> >>> Sorry, I don't have capacity at the moment to work on this. >>> >>> Ayden >>> >>> >>> ??????? Original Message ??????? >>> On Tuesday, 1 October 2019 17:51, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < >>> mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> If other EPD Councilors can?t, I can raise the hand to have a seat and >>> let you work on it in the shadow (since I am also overworked and not >>> involved in EPDP it didn?t make sense for me to do it myself). Let me know. >>> >>> Best, >>> Mart?n >>> >>> On 1 Oct 2019, at 12:14, farzaneh badii >>> wrote: >>> >>> I was looking at the council notes and I see that non of our councilors >>> have volunteered for the small team to write a response to Goran. As I have >>> raised it on the mailing list, this is an important matter at EPDP. May I >>> ask one of the councilors to volunteer, if not too late? It is not gonna >>> take a long time and I can help and brief you (a thread about this is >>> already on NCSG mailing list). We can't have two members of drafting team >>> from IPC and BC and one from registrar! We need to get involved. >>> >>> >>> Farzaneh >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > > > -- > Dorothy Gordon > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Fri Oct 4 22:54:22 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 15:54:22 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> Message-ID: Hey folks, This is happening, and I thought I would put it on your radar. For context, while the draft was being revisited I sent an email to the council (hoping for a discussion) saying that I would suggest that the organizations or entities that are listed for consultation should not have any conflict of interest in matters that come in relation to IRPs. Staff edited the draft and removed WIPO from the list along with one other org I believe. Following that, Flip sent this email to the council list accordingly. I would be happy to hear back from you about this if you have any thoughts. Best, Elsa ? ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Drazek, Keith Date: Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:26 PM Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) To: fpetillion at petillion.law , julie.hedlund at icann.org , elsa.saade at gmail.com < elsa.saade at gmail.com>, council at gnso.icann.org Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip Petillion *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S ; Council at gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion at petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [image: signature_1434183782] Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats *From: *council on behalf of Julie Hedlund *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < council at gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie *From: *Elsa S *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM *To: *Julie Hedlund *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa ? On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director *From: *council on behalf of Andrea Glandon *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here . If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* *Action Items:* - None *Item 3: Consent Agenda * *Action items:* - None *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* *Action items:* - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* *Action items:* - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 >From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report* *Action items:* - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* *Action items:* - None *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* *Action items:* - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* *Action items:* - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] * to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * *Action items:* - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* *Action items:* - *None* *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed Public Interest Framework* *Action items:* - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. *Andrea Glandon* GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org *Skype ID:* acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] _______________________________________________ council mailing list council at gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] ) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] ). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Mon Oct 7 12:46:03 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 09:46:03 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> Message-ID: Thank you for spotting this, Elsa. I have sent a brief statement of support to the Council list now. It is outrageous that they tried to insert such biased language. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Friday, 4. October 2019 21:54, Elsa S wrote: > Hey folks, > > This is happening, and I thought I would put it on your radar. For context, while the draft was being revisited I sent an email to the council (hoping for a discussion) saying that I would suggest that the organizations or entities that are listed for consultation should not have any conflict of interest in matters that come in relation to IRPs. Staff edited the draft and removed WIPO from the list along with one other org I believe. > > Following that, Flip sent this email to the council list accordingly. I would be happy to hear back from you about this if you have any thoughts. > > Best, > > Elsa > ? > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Drazek, Keith > Date: Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:26 PM > Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > To: fpetillion at petillion.law , julie.hedlund at icann.org , elsa.saade at gmail.com , council at gnso.icann.org > > Hi Flip, > > Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. > > Thanks, > > Keith > > From: council On Behalf Of Flip Petillion > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM > To: Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S ; Council at gnso.icann.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > All: > > Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). > > I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. > > So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact)[]. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? > > Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. > > In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: > > - We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or > > - The objection could be withdrawn. > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > Flip > > P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > [signature_1434183782](http://www.petillion.law/) > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > From: council on behalf of Julie Hedlund > Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 > To: Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > Dear Elsa and Councilors, > > As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > From: Elsa S > Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM > To: Julie Hedlund > Cc: "Council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > Hi Julie, > > Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. > > Best, > > Elsa > > ? > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund wrote: > >> Dear Councilors, >> >> Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: >> >> Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. >> >> With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> From: council on behalf of Andrea Glandon >> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM >> To: "Council at gnso.icann.org" >> Cc: "'gnso-secs at icann.org'" >> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 >> >> Dear Councilors, >> >> Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. >> >> Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page [here](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=). If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. >> >> Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. >> >> ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 >> >> Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List >> >> Action Items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 3: Consent Agenda >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. >> >> - Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. >> >> Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. >> >> - ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. >> >> Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report >> >> Action items: >> >> - Small team to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. >> >> Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. >> >> Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion >> >> Action items: >> >> - PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. >> >> Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. >> >> Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS >> >> 12.1 - [Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=) to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed Public Interest Framework >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. >> >> - ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. >> >> Andrea Glandon >> >> GNSO SO/AC Support >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> Email: andrea.glandon at icann.org >> >> Skype ID: acglandon76 >> >> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: [https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=) >> >> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: [https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=) >> >> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the [GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=) >> >> See All SO and AC events on the [ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> council mailing list >> council at gnso.icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=)) and the website Terms of Service ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=)). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > -- > > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 15:09:15 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 08:09:15 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> Message-ID: Thanks Ayden! I haven?t heard back from Flip or Keith on this yet, but I?m definitely keeping an eye out for any developments! E. ? On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:46 AM Ayden F?rdeline wrote: > Thank you for spotting this, Elsa. I have sent a brief statement of > support to the Council list now. It is outrageous that they tried to insert > such biased language. > > Ayden > > > ??????? Original Message ??????? > On Friday, 4. October 2019 21:54, Elsa S wrote: > > Hey folks, > > This is happening, and I thought I would put it on your radar. For > context, while the draft was being revisited I sent an email to the council > (hoping for a discussion) saying that I would suggest that the > organizations or entities that are listed for consultation should not have > any conflict of interest in matters that come in relation to IRPs. Staff > edited the draft and removed WIPO from the list along with one other org I > believe. > > Following that, Flip sent this email to the council list accordingly. I > would be happy to hear back from you about this if you have any thoughts. > > Best, > > Elsa > ? > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: *Drazek, Keith* > Date: Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:26 PM > Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions > on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > To: fpetillion at petillion.law , > julie.hedlund at icann.org , elsa.saade at gmail.com < > elsa.saade at gmail.com>, council at gnso.icann.org > > > Hi Flip, > > > > Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement > within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal > of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the > comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and > the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch > for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need > to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. > > > > Thanks, > > Keith > > > > *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip > Petillion > *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM > *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S < > elsa.saade at gmail.com>; Council at gnso.icann.org > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response > to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > All: > > > > Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. > However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO > as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict > has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed > (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). > > > > I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that > objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an > absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), > the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine > the disposition of the question. > > > > So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those > [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This > is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a > material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source > that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am > not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No > organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the > nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an > actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by > ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? > > > > Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution > provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with > a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized > institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies > are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated > the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the > benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five > (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has > moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes > process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally > to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to > be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership > responsibilities. > > > > In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: > > > > 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council > debate on the subject; or > 2. The objection could be withdrawn. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Flip > > > > P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO > Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the > list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, > ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now > may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the > contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on > PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last > council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any > subsequent actions. > > > > > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > > > [image: signature_1434183782] > > > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > > > > > > > > > *From: *council on behalf of Julie > Hedlund > *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 > *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < > council at gnso.icann.org> > *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to > Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > Dear Elsa and Councilors, > > > > As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s > suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached > final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by > Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. > > > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > > > *From: *Elsa S > *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM > *To: *Julie Hedlund > *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" > *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions > on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > Hi Julie, > > > > Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the > external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those > with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. > > > > Best, > > > > Elsa > > ? > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund > wrote: > > Dear Councilors, > > > > Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: > > > > *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the > Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to > address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for > sending to ICANN org. > > > > With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and > provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the > actions. > > > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > > > *From: *council on behalf of Andrea > Glandon > *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM > *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" > *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" > *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 > > > > Dear Councilors, > > > > Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO > Council call held on 19 September 2019. > > > > Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have > been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki > page here > . > If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be > highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this > page for the recent status updates on the Action items. > > > > Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. > > > > *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* > > > > *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* > > > > *Action Items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 3: Consent Agenda * > > > > *Action items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT > recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 > September 2019. > - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send > response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. > > > > *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer > Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the > IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of > the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy > development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. > - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small > drafting team. > > > > *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights > Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 > From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about > new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical > expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft > by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the > GAC/IGOs for their review. > > > > *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on > Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process > (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to > address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review > and approval for sending to ICANN org. > > > > *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s > Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* > > > > *Action items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be > solicited. > > > > *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to > Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. > > > > *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the > Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* > to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft > for sending to ICANN org. > > > > *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* > > > > *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] > * > to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name > Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. > > *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer > Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *None* > > > > *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed > Public Interest Framework* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response > to the public comment period. > - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small > drafting team. > > > > *Andrea Glandon* > > GNSO SO/AC Support > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org > > *Skype ID:* acglandon76 > > > > Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ > [learn.icann.org] > > > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] > > > Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are > located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] > > > See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > council mailing list > council at gnso.icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your > personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance > with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy > [icann.org] > ) > and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos > [icann.org] > ). > You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or > configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or > disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > -- > > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > > > -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 18:38:48 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 11:38:48 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> Message-ID: Any thoughts on this folks? It seems there?s pressure on adding WIPO on the list. I probably will not have time for a call for this. But if anyone wants to weigh in, I could potentially send an email with our discussion points. Thoughts are encouraged and appreciated from all, E. ? ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Flip Petillion Date: Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:25 AM Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) To: Drazek, Keith , julie.hedlund at icann.org < julie.hedlund at icann.org>, elsa.saade at gmail.com , council at gnso.icann.org Hi Keith, All, I still don?t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is ?the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.? In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion at petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [image: signature_2376235] Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats *From: *"Drazek, Keith" *Date: *Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 *To: *Flip Petillion , "julie.hedlund at icann.org" < julie.hedlund at icann.org>, "elsa.saade at gmail.com" , " council at gnso.icann.org" *Subject: *RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip Petillion *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S ; Council at gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion at petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [image: signature_1434183782] Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats *From: *council on behalf of Julie Hedlund *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < council at gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie *From: *Elsa S *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM *To: *Julie Hedlund *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa ? On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director *From: *council on behalf of Andrea Glandon *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here . If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* *Action Items:* - None *Item 3: Consent Agenda * *Action items:* - None *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* *Action items:* - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* *Action items:* - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 >From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report* *Action items:* - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* *Action items:* - None *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* *Action items:* - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* *Action items:* - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* *Action items:* - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] * to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * *Action items:* - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* *Action items:* - *None* *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed Public Interest Framework* *Action items:* - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. *Andrea Glandon* GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org *Skype ID:* acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] _______________________________________________ council mailing list council at gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] ) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] ). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 7394 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 19:02:21 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:02:21 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> Message-ID: Hi Elsa This is absurd. There is pressure from "one" constituency it seems, so it's just one person and no one else is talking. And the claim that WIPO brings diversity is unfounded. If there has to be diversity then they need to have arbitration centers from developing countries listed as well. But why list orgs at all? I think you need not even have a meeting about this. You don't have time and you have explained the reasons why it should not be there. What do other councilors from other stakeholder groups think? During that meeting, what is going to be achieved? Are all councilors gonna be there? I don't know why you need to have another meeting. Farzaneh On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:39 AM Elsa S wrote: > Any thoughts on this folks? It seems there?s pressure on adding WIPO on > the list. I probably will not have time for a call for this. But if anyone > wants to weigh in, I could potentially send an email with our discussion > points. > > Thoughts are encouraged and appreciated from all, > > E. > ? > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Flip Petillion > Date: Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:25 AM > Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions > on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > To: Drazek, Keith , julie.hedlund at icann.org < > julie.hedlund at icann.org>, elsa.saade at gmail.com , > council at gnso.icann.org > > > Hi Keith, > > All, > > > > I still don?t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO > would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN > request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator > selection processes. > > > > Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration > of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of > Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list > of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a > narrow selection before even starting the process. > > > > As to WIPO, it is ?the global forum for IP services, policy, information > and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced > and effective international IP system that enables innovation and > creativity for the benefit of all.? > > > > In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and > past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other > institutions. > > > > I await the doodle invite. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Flip > > > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > > > [image: signature_2376235] > > > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > > > > > > > > > *From: *"Drazek, Keith" > *Date: *Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 > *To: *Flip Petillion , "julie.hedlund at icann.org" > , "elsa.saade at gmail.com" , > "council at gnso.icann.org" > *Subject: *RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to > Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > Hi Flip, > > > > Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement > within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal > of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the > comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and > the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch > for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need > to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. > > > > Thanks, > > Keith > > > > *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip > Petillion > *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM > *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S < > elsa.saade at gmail.com>; Council at gnso.icann.org > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response > to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > All: > > > > Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. > However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO > as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict > has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed > (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). > > > > I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that > objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an > absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), > the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine > the disposition of the question. > > > > So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those > [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This > is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a > material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source > that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am > not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No > organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the > nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an > actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by > ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? > > > > Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution > provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with > a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized > institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies > are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated > the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the > benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five > (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has > moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes > process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally > to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to > be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership > responsibilities. > > > > In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: > > > > 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council > debate on the subject; or > 2. The objection could be withdrawn. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Flip > > > > P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO > Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the > list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, > ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now > may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the > contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on > PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last > council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any > subsequent actions. > > > > > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > > > [image: signature_1434183782] > > > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > > > > > > > > > *From: *council on behalf of Julie > Hedlund > *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 > *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < > council at gnso.icann.org> > *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to > Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > Dear Elsa and Councilors, > > > > As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s > suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached > final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by > Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. > > > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > > > *From: *Elsa S > *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM > *To: *Julie Hedlund > *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" > *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions > on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > > > Hi Julie, > > > > Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the > external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those > with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. > > > > Best, > > > > Elsa > > ? > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund > wrote: > > Dear Councilors, > > > > Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: > > > > *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the > Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to > address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for > sending to ICANN org. > > > > With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and > provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the > actions. > > > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > > > *From: *council on behalf of Andrea > Glandon > *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM > *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" > *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" > *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 > > > > Dear Councilors, > > > > Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO > Council call held on 19 September 2019. > > > > Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have > been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki > page here > . > If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be > highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this > page for the recent status updates on the Action items. > > > > Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. > > > > *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* > > > > *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* > > > > *Action Items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 3: Consent Agenda * > > > > *Action items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT > recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 > September 2019. > - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send > response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. > > > > *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer > Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the > IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of > the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy > development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. > - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small > drafting team. > > > > *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights > Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 > From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about > new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical > expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft > by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the > GAC/IGOs for their review. > > > > *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on > Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process > (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to > address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review > and approval for sending to ICANN org. > > > > *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s > Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* > > > > *Action items:* > > - None > > > > *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be > solicited. > > > > *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to > Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. > > > > *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the > Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* > to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft > for sending to ICANN org. > > > > *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* > > > > *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] > * > to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name > Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. > > *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer > Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *None* > > > > *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed > Public Interest Framework* > > > > *Action items:* > > - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response > to the public comment period. > - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small > drafting team. > > > > *Andrea Glandon* > > GNSO SO/AC Support > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org > > *Skype ID:* acglandon76 > > > > Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ > [learn.icann.org] > > > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] > > > Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are > located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] > > > See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > council mailing list > council at gnso.icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your > personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance > with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy > [icann.org] > ) > and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos > [icann.org] > ). > You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or > configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or > disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > -- > > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 7394 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Mon Oct 7 19:03:18 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 16:03:18 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> Message-ID: This is disappointing. Seems the Council Chair is keen to placate the IPC, and likely at our expense. I hope other Councillors will chime in on the Council list disagreeing with the inclusion of WIPO in this letter. Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:38, Elsa S wrote: > Any thoughts on this folks? It seems there?s pressure on adding WIPO on the list. I probably will not have time for a call for this. But if anyone wants to weigh in, I could potentially send an email with our discussion points. > > Thoughts are encouraged and appreciated from all, > > E. > ? > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Flip Petillion > Date: Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:25 AM > Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > To: Drazek, Keith , julie.hedlund at icann.org , elsa.saade at gmail.com , council at gnso.icann.org > > Hi Keith, > > All, > > I still don?t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. > > Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. > > As to WIPO, it is ?the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.? > > In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. > > I await the doodle invite. > > Best regards, > > Flip > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > [signature_2376235](http://www.petillion.law/) > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > From: "Drazek, Keith" > Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 > To: Flip Petillion , "julie.hedlund at icann.org" , "elsa.saade at gmail.com" , "council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > Hi Flip, > > Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. > > Thanks, > > Keith > > From: council On Behalf Of Flip Petillion > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM > To: Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S ; Council at gnso.icann.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > All: > > Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). > > I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. > > So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact)[]. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? > > Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. > > In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: > > - We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or > > - The objection could be withdrawn. > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > Flip > > P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. > > Flip Petillion > > fpetillion at petillion.law > > +32484652653 > > www.petillion.law > > [signature_1434183782](http://www.petillion.law/) > > Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats > > From: council on behalf of Julie Hedlund > Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 > To: Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > Dear Elsa and Councilors, > > As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. > > Kind regards, > > Julie > > From: Elsa S > Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM > To: Julie Hedlund > Cc: "Council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) > > Hi Julie, > > Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. > > Best, > > Elsa > > ? > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund wrote: > >> Dear Councilors, >> >> Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: >> >> Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. >> >> With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> From: council on behalf of Andrea Glandon >> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM >> To: "Council at gnso.icann.org" >> Cc: "'gnso-secs at icann.org'" >> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 >> >> Dear Councilors, >> >> Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. >> >> Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page [here](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=). If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. >> >> Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. >> >> ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 >> >> Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List >> >> Action Items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 3: Consent Agenda >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. >> >> - Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. >> >> Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. >> >> - ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. >> >> Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report >> >> Action items: >> >> - Small team to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. >> >> Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. >> >> Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion >> >> Action items: >> >> - PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. >> >> Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> Action items: >> >> - Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. >> >> Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS >> >> 12.1 - [Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=) to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote >> >> Action items: >> >> - None >> >> NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed Public Interest Framework >> >> Action items: >> >> - Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. >> >> - ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. >> >> Andrea Glandon >> >> GNSO SO/AC Support >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> Email: andrea.glandon at icann.org >> >> Skype ID: acglandon76 >> >> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: [https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=) >> >> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: [https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=) >> >> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the [GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=) >> >> See All SO and AC events on the [ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> council mailing list >> council at gnso.icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=)) and the website Terms of Service ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=)). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > -- > > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 7394 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 23:19:20 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:19:20 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> Message-ID: Very valid questions Farzi! And on point. I see Ayden has already showed support to not having a call rather a discussion on the list which i would definitely support as well. It seems Flip did not even read my email, especially that it actually answers all the points he mentions in his email already. I?m not sure how many councilors have been following the emails but I would push that we stand our ground as councilors. I would very much appreciate if other councilors, like Ayden would chime in on the list! And if anyone would be interested in asking councilors from other SGs and Cs about their thoughts on this, it would also be beneficial to hear them out too. I?ll try to reach out too. Best, Elsa ? On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:02 PM farzaneh badii wrote: > Hi Elsa > > This is absurd. There is pressure from "one" constituency it seems, so > it's just one person and no one else is talking. And the claim that WIPO > brings diversity is unfounded. If there has to be diversity then they need > to have arbitration centers from developing countries listed as well. But > why list orgs at all? I think you need not even have a meeting about this. > You don't have time and you have explained the reasons why it should not be > there. What do other councilors from other stakeholder groups think? During > that meeting, what is going to be achieved? Are all councilors gonna be > there? I don't know why you need to have another meeting. > > > > Farzaneh > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:39 AM Elsa S wrote: > >> Any thoughts on this folks? It seems there?s pressure on adding WIPO on >> the list. I probably will not have time for a call for this. But if anyone >> wants to weigh in, I could potentially send an email with our discussion >> points. >> >> Thoughts are encouraged and appreciated from all, >> >> E. >> ? >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Flip Petillion >> Date: Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:25 AM >> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions >> on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> To: Drazek, Keith , julie.hedlund at icann.org < >> julie.hedlund at icann.org>, elsa.saade at gmail.com , >> council at gnso.icann.org >> >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> All, >> >> >> >> I still don?t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO >> would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN >> request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator >> selection processes. >> >> >> >> Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration >> of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of >> Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list >> of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a >> narrow selection before even starting the process. >> >> >> >> As to WIPO, it is ?the global forum for IP services, policy, information >> and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced >> and effective international IP system that enables innovation and >> creativity for the benefit of all.? >> >> >> >> In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and >> past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other >> institutions. >> >> >> >> I await the doodle invite. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> >> Flip >> >> >> >> Flip Petillion >> >> fpetillion at petillion.law >> >> +32484652653 >> >> www.petillion.law >> >> >> >> [image: signature_2376235] >> >> >> >> Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From: *"Drazek, Keith" >> *Date: *Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 >> *To: *Flip Petillion , "julie.hedlund at icann.org" >> , "elsa.saade at gmail.com" , >> "council at gnso.icann.org" >> *Subject: *RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to >> Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> >> >> Hi Flip, >> >> >> >> Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement >> within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal >> of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the >> comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and >> the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch >> for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need >> to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Keith >> >> >> >> *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip >> Petillion >> *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM >> *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S < >> elsa.saade at gmail.com>; Council at gnso.icann.org >> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft >> Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team >> (IRP-IOT) >> >> >> >> All: >> >> >> >> Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. >> However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO >> as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict >> has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed >> (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). >> >> >> >> I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that >> objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an >> absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), >> the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine >> the disposition of the question. >> >> >> >> So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those >> [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This >> is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a >> material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source >> that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am >> not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No >> organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the >> nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an >> actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by >> ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? >> >> >> >> Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution >> provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with >> a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized >> institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies >> are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated >> the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the >> benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five >> (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has >> moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes >> process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally >> to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to >> be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership >> responsibilities. >> >> >> >> In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: >> >> >> >> 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have >> council debate on the subject; or >> 2. The objection could be withdrawn. >> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> Flip >> >> >> >> P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO >> Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the >> list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, >> ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now >> may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the >> contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on >> PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last >> council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any >> subsequent actions. >> >> >> >> >> >> Flip Petillion >> >> fpetillion at petillion.law >> >> +32484652653 >> >> www.petillion.law >> >> >> >> [image: signature_1434183782] >> >> >> >> Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From: *council on behalf of Julie >> Hedlund >> *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 >> *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < >> council at gnso.icann.org> >> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to >> Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> >> >> Dear Elsa and Councilors, >> >> >> >> As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s >> suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached >> final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by >> Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Julie >> >> >> >> *From: *Elsa S >> *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM >> *To: *Julie Hedlund >> *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" >> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions >> on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >> >> >> >> Hi Julie, >> >> >> >> Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the >> external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those >> with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Elsa >> >> ? >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund >> wrote: >> >> Dear Councilors, >> >> >> >> Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: >> >> >> >> *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the >> Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to >> address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for >> sending to ICANN org. >> >> >> >> With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and >> provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the >> actions. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> >> >> >> *From: *council on behalf of Andrea >> Glandon >> *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM >> *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" >> *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" >> *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 >> >> >> >> Dear Councilors, >> >> >> >> Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO >> Council call held on 19 September 2019. >> >> >> >> Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have >> been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki >> page here >> . >> If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be >> highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this >> page for the recent status updates on the Action items. >> >> >> >> Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. >> >> >> >> *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* >> >> >> >> *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* >> >> >> >> *Action Items:* >> >> - None >> >> >> >> *Item 3: Consent Agenda * >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - None >> >> >> >> *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT >> recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 >> September 2019. >> - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send >> response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. >> >> >> >> *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer >> Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the >> IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of >> the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy >> development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. >> - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small >> drafting team. >> >> >> >> *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All >> Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate >> Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection >> Mechanisms Final Report* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about >> new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical >> expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft >> by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the >> GAC/IGOs for their review. >> >> >> >> *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on >> Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process >> (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to >> address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review >> and approval for sending to ICANN org. >> >> >> >> *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s >> Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - None >> >> >> >> *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be >> solicited. >> >> >> >> *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to >> Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> >> >> *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the >> Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* >> to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft >> for sending to ICANN org. >> >> >> >> *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* >> >> >> >> *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] >> * >> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name >> Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. >> >> *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the >> Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *None* >> >> >> >> *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s Proposed >> Public Interest Framework* >> >> >> >> *Action items:* >> >> - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response >> to the public comment period. >> - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small >> drafting team. >> >> >> >> *Andrea Glandon* >> >> GNSO SO/AC Support >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org >> >> *Skype ID:* acglandon76 >> >> >> >> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ >> [learn.icann.org] >> >> >> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] >> >> >> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are >> located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] >> >> >> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar >> [features.icann.org] >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> council mailing list >> council at gnso.icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council >> >> _______________________________________________ >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy >> [icann.org] >> ) >> and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos >> [icann.org] >> ). >> You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> Elsa Saade >> Consultant >> >> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >> >> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >> -- >> -- >> >> Elsa Saade >> Consultant >> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >> > _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 7394 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tatiana.tropina at gmail.com Mon Oct 7 23:36:32 2019 From: tatiana.tropina at gmail.com (Tatiana Tropina) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:36:32 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) In-Reply-To: References: <70D7775A-44F1-4DCE-AF09-A60363BD462D@icann.org> <9a16d152a2984c458b716b1db5bbd7a0@verisign.com> <3A468E0F-D04B-48D8-B596-650DC0123EB4@petillion.law> Message-ID: Elsa, I was following the emails. I wasn't sure how much of NCSG councillors should weigh in as we would be counted as one SG anyway -- for them, we are an entity -- or a sort -- of when we agree. I did write an email to support your point - as you won't be able to make this call, the broader discussion is the only way to go, of course. However, we should be prepared that this might lead to someone siding with the other position. Cheers, Tanya On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 22:19, Elsa S wrote: > Very valid questions Farzi! And on point. I see Ayden has already showed > support to not having a call rather a discussion on the list which i would > definitely support as well. It seems Flip did not even read my email, > especially that it actually answers all the points he mentions in his email > already. > > I?m not sure how many councilors have been following the emails but I > would push that we stand our ground as councilors. I would very much > appreciate if other councilors, like Ayden would chime in on the list! And > if anyone would be interested in asking councilors from other SGs and Cs > about their thoughts on this, it would also be beneficial to hear them out > too. I?ll try to reach out too. > > Best, > > Elsa > ? > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:02 PM farzaneh badii > wrote: > >> Hi Elsa >> >> This is absurd. There is pressure from "one" constituency it seems, so >> it's just one person and no one else is talking. And the claim that WIPO >> brings diversity is unfounded. If there has to be diversity then they need >> to have arbitration centers from developing countries listed as well. But >> why list orgs at all? I think you need not even have a meeting about this. >> You don't have time and you have explained the reasons why it should not be >> there. What do other councilors from other stakeholder groups think? During >> that meeting, what is going to be achieved? Are all councilors gonna be >> there? I don't know why you need to have another meeting. >> >> >> >> Farzaneh >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:39 AM Elsa S wrote: >> >>> Any thoughts on this folks? It seems there?s pressure on adding WIPO on >>> the list. I probably will not have time for a call for this. But if anyone >>> wants to weigh in, I could potentially send an email with our discussion >>> points. >>> >>> Thoughts are encouraged and appreciated from all, >>> >>> E. >>> ? >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>> From: Flip Petillion >>> Date: Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:25 AM >>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to >>> Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >>> To: Drazek, Keith , julie.hedlund at icann.org < >>> julie.hedlund at icann.org>, elsa.saade at gmail.com , >>> council at gnso.icann.org >>> >>> >>> Hi Keith, >>> >>> All, >>> >>> >>> >>> I still don?t read any substantiation in support of the >>> allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to >>> assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential >>> expert/arbitrator selection processes. >>> >>> >>> >>> Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal >>> Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for >>> the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a >>> diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias >>> by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. >>> >>> >>> >>> As to WIPO, it is ?the global forum for IP services, policy, information >>> and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced >>> and effective international IP system that enables innovation and >>> creativity for the benefit of all.? >>> >>> >>> >>> In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and >>> past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other >>> institutions. >>> >>> >>> >>> I await the doodle invite. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Flip >>> >>> >>> >>> Flip Petillion >>> >>> fpetillion at petillion.law >>> >>> +32484652653 >>> >>> www.petillion.law >>> >>> >>> >>> [image: signature_2376235] >>> >>> >>> >>> Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *"Drazek, Keith" >>> *Date: *Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 >>> *To: *Flip Petillion , " >>> julie.hedlund at icann.org" , " >>> elsa.saade at gmail.com" , "council at gnso.icann.org" < >>> council at gnso.icann.org> >>> *Subject: *RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to >>> Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Flip, >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement >>> within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal >>> of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the >>> comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and >>> the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch >>> for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need >>> to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* council *On Behalf Of *Flip >>> Petillion >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM >>> *To:* Julie Hedlund ; Elsa S < >>> elsa.saade at gmail.com>; Council at gnso.icann.org >>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft >>> Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team >>> (IRP-IOT) >>> >>> >>> >>> All: >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback >>> presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to >>> remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, >>> this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it >>> been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties >>> concerned). >>> >>> >>> >>> I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that >>> objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an >>> absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), >>> the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine >>> the disposition of the question. >>> >>> >>> >>> So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ?removing those >>> [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.? This >>> is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a >>> material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source >>> that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am >>> not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No >>> organisation was identified as having a ?conflict of interest given the >>> nature of an IRP.? No explanation has been given as to the existence of an >>> actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by >>> ?the nature of an IRP? in this context? >>> >>> >>> >>> Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute >>> resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be >>> consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an >>> internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member >>> States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has >>> neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for >>> more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, >>> which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their >>> policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in >>> managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no >>> basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the >>> list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council >>> and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. >>> >>> >>> >>> In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: >>> >>> >>> >>> 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have >>> council debate on the subject; or >>> 2. The objection could be withdrawn. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Flip >>> >>> >>> >>> P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO >>> Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the >>> list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, >>> ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now >>> may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the >>> contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on >>> PCA?s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last >>> council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any >>> subsequent actions. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Flip Petillion >>> >>> fpetillion at petillion.law >>> >>> +32484652653 >>> >>> www.petillion.law >>> >>> >>> >>> [image: signature_1434183782] >>> >>> >>> >>> Attorneys ? Advocaten - Avocats >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *council on behalf of Julie >>> Hedlund >>> *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 >>> *To: *Elsa S , "Council at gnso.icann.org" < >>> council at gnso.icann.org> >>> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to >>> Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Elsa and Councilors, >>> >>> >>> >>> As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa?s >>> suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached >>> final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by >>> Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *Elsa S >>> *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM >>> *To: *Julie Hedlund >>> *Cc: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" >>> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions >>> on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Julie, >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the >>> external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those >>> with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> >>> >>> Elsa >>> >>> ? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund >>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Councilors, >>> >>> >>> >>> Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the >>> Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to >>> address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for >>> sending to ICANN org. >>> >>> >>> >>> With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and >>> provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the >>> actions. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *council on behalf of Andrea >>> Glandon >>> *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM >>> *To: *"Council at gnso.icann.org" >>> *Cc: *"'gnso-secs at icann.org'" >>> *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September >>> 2019 >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Councilors, >>> >>> >>> >>> Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the >>> GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have >>> been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki >>> page here >>> . >>> If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be >>> highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this >>> page for the recent status updates on the Action items. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. >>> >>> >>> >>> *ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action Items:* >>> >>> - None >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 3: Consent Agenda * >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - None >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT >>> recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 >>> September 2019. >>> - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send >>> response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer >>> Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the >>> IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of >>> the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy >>> development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. >>> - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small >>> drafting team. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Draft Amendments to the Review of All >>> Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate >>> Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection >>> Mechanisms Final Report* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Small team* to address Councilors? feedback (e.g., language about >>> new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical >>> expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft >>> by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the >>> GAC/IGOs for their review. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? ICANN Org?s Request for Clarification on >>> Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process >>> (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to >>> address Councilors? feedback and complete revised draft for Council review >>> and approval for sending to ICANN org. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org?s >>> Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - None >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be >>> solicited. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to >>> Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the >>> Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* >>> to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft >>> for sending to ICANN org. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS* >>> >>> >>> >>> *12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] >>> * >>> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name >>> Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. * >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board. >>> >>> *12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the >>> Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *None* >>> >>> >>> >>> *NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board?s >>> Proposed Public Interest Framework* >>> >>> >>> >>> *Action items:* >>> >>> - *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response >>> to the public comment period. >>> - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small >>> drafting team. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Andrea Glandon* >>> >>> GNSO SO/AC Support >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> *Email:* andrea.glandon at icann.org >>> >>> *Skype ID:* acglandon76 >>> >>> >>> >>> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ >>> [learn.icann.org] >>> >>> >>> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] >>> >>> >>> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are >>> located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] >>> >>> >>> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar >>> [features.icann.org] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> council mailing list >>> council at gnso.icann.org >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your >>> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance >>> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy >>> [icann.org] >>> ) >>> and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos >>> [icann.org] >>> ). >>> You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or >>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or >>> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Elsa Saade >>> Consultant >>> >>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >>> >>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >>> -- >>> -- >>> >>> Elsa Saade >>> Consultant >>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >> -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 7394 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7393 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 02:45:32 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 08:45:32 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi all, the deadline for submission is 18th Oct, there is no volunteers in NCSG list and we shouldn't miss this opportunity. Best, Rafik Le mer. 2 oct. 2019 ? 08:28, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > Hi, > > bringing this topic to PC again as we need drafter and working the NCSG > response to the proposed framework. > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > De : Rafik Dammak > Date: mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 09:05 > Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest > To: NCSG > > > Hi, > > the details about public consultation below. I created a google doc so we > can start the drafting for a NCSG Comment > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nZJ91SSW55Isl2iBAEASopfYnWcsgsBcXdB5hUUjNdI/edit. > you can listen to webinar recordings here > https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit . > > Best, > > Rafik > > From 18 September ? 18 October 2019, a community consultation is taking > place on the global public interest framework proposed by the ICANN > Board. In reviewing the proposal, the ICANN Board is asking the ICANN > community to consider the following questions for input to the ICANN Board: > > 1. What are your thoughts on the proposed framework approach? Do you > have any suggestions for how it could be improved? > > 2. What are your thoughts on the proposed approach for decisions in the > ICANN ecosystem to be accompanied by a consideration of their impact on the > global public interest (as well as an explanation regarding what is meant > by the GPI in the specific case)? > > 3. How do you see this working for the Supporting Organization (SO), > Advisory Committee (AC), constituency, group, review team, or > cross-community working group (CCWG) to which you are contributing? > > > > The global public interest is central to many of ICANN?s primary > governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in > facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework > as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. > These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are > made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the > commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific > recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the globalpublic interest. > This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the public interest > determination the latter must make in its decisions. > > > > To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper > [r20.rs6.net] > . > Community feedback is welcome by *Friday, 18 October 2019 via email at **gpitoolkit at icann.org > *. After the community consultation, there will be > a public session at ICANN66, followed by a Public Comment proceeding. > > Le mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 08:53, Elsa S a ?crit : > >> Thanks for sharing Milton! >> >> ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context basis >> given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this month. >> >> Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I?ve seen, has been pushing >> for not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to actively >> work on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally biased way. >> >> I?m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation phase >> (even though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase instead), >> but would also invite that we all have a discussion about the proposed way >> forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively. >> >> Best, >> >> Elsa >> ? >> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L >> wrote: >> >>> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service >>> broadcasting and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik >>> Chin: >>> >>> >>> >>> ?The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the Public >>> Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions without >>> definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ?PI?, either. >>> This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to interpret >>> ?PI? in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights. Chin, Y.C >>> 2012. >>> >>> >>> >>> Food for thought >>> >>> >>> >>> Dr. Milton L Mueller >>> >>> School of Public Policy >>> >>> Georgia Institute of Technology >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> -- >> >> Elsa Saade >> Consultant >> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Tue Oct 8 06:04:42 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 23:04:42 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rafik, I?m a bit overworked this month unfortunately, but I would be happy to review, suggest and comment on any doc that?s prepared by NCSG. May I suggest that we take it on the list again and ask for urgent volunteers on this? Maybe also extent the urgent email to the NCUC list too? Warmly, E. ? On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 7:43 PM Rafik Dammak wrote: > hi all, > > the deadline for submission is 18th Oct, there is no volunteers in NCSG > list and we shouldn't miss this opportunity. > > Best, > > Rafik > > Le mer. 2 oct. 2019 ? 08:28, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> Hi, >> >> bringing this topic to PC again as we need drafter and working the NCSG >> response to the proposed framework. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> De : Rafik Dammak >> Date: mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 09:05 >> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] ICANN and the Public interest >> To: NCSG >> >> >> Hi, >> >> the details about public consultation below. I created a google doc so we >> can start the drafting for a NCSG Comment >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nZJ91SSW55Isl2iBAEASopfYnWcsgsBcXdB5hUUjNdI/edit. >> you can listen to webinar recordings here >> https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit . >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> From 18 September ? 18 October 2019, a community consultation is taking >> place on the global public interest framework proposed by the ICANN >> Board. In reviewing the proposal, the ICANN Board is asking the ICANN >> community to consider the following questions for input to the ICANN Board: >> >> 1. What are your thoughts on the proposed framework approach? Do you >> have any suggestions for how it could be improved? >> >> 2. What are your thoughts on the proposed approach for decisions in the >> ICANN ecosystem to be accompanied by a consideration of their impact on the >> global public interest (as well as an explanation regarding what is >> meant by the GPI in the specific case)? >> >> 3. How do you see this working for the Supporting Organization (SO), >> Advisory Committee (AC), constituency, group, review team, or >> cross-community working group (CCWG) to which you are contributing? >> >> >> >> The global public interest is central to many of ICANN?s primary >> governance documents, and the ICANN Board hopes to play a role in >> facilitating a bottom-up, community-driven process to develop a framework >> as a toolkit for the ICANN community to consider the global public interest. >> These considerations would not change the process by which decisions are >> made but could instead serve as tools for the community to reinforce the >> commitment to the public interest and to demonstrate how specific >> recommendations, advice, and public comments are in the globalpublic interest. >> This includes the ICANN community guiding the ICANN Board about the >> public interest determination the latter must make in its decisions. >> >> >> >> To learn more about the framework, please read the discussion paper >> [r20.rs6.net] >> . >> Community feedback is welcome by *Friday, 18 October 2019 via email at **gpitoolkit at icann.org >> *. After the community consultation, there will be >> a public session at ICANN66, followed by a Public Comment proceeding. >> >> Le mar. 24 sept. 2019 ? 08:53, Elsa S a ?crit : >> >>> Thanks for sharing Milton! >>> >>> ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context basis >>> given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this month. >>> >>> Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I?ve seen, has been pushing >>> for not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to actively >>> work on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally biased way. >>> >>> I?m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation phase >>> (even though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase instead), >>> but would also invite that we all have a discussion about the proposed way >>> forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Elsa >>> ? >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service >>>> broadcasting and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik >>>> Chin: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ?The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the Public >>>> Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions without >>>> definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ?PI?, either. >>>> This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to interpret >>>> ?PI? in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights. Chin, Y.C >>>> 2012. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Food for thought >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Milton L Mueller >>>> >>>> School of Public Policy >>>> >>>> Georgia Institute of Technology >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> >>> Elsa Saade >>> Consultant >>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights >>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade >>> >> _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Wed Oct 9 03:02:59 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:02:59 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_Im?= =?utf-8?q?prove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakehol?= =?utf-8?q?der_Model?= Message-ID: Hi all, the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments for Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the google doc here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get draft and review it in NCSG list. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Thu Oct 10 23:21:52 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 16:21:52 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_I?= =?utf-8?q?mprove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakeho?= =?utf-8?q?lder_Model?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I?ve taken the lead with Amr on the GPI comment, would anyone from the councilors be willing to take this on as pen holder? So many comments..!! E. ? On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:03 PM Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi all, > > the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments for > Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit > comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the > google doc here > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit > The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get > draft and review it in NCSG list. > > Best, > > Rafik > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca Fri Oct 11 00:20:53 2019 From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:20:53 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_I?= =?utf-8?q?mprove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakeholder_Mo?= =?utf-8?q?del?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2DD43917-052A-46EF-89F9-24ED92FE1FD4@digitaldiscretion.ca> Bruce Schneier runs a website with public interest technology references and studies. You might find some of this research helpful in the ICANN context. Steph Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 10, 2019, at 16:21, Elsa S wrote: > > I?ve taken the lead with Amr on the GPI comment, would anyone from the councilors be willing to take this on as pen holder? > > So many comments..!! > > E. > ? > >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:03 PM Rafik Dammak wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments for Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the google doc here >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit >> The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get draft and review it in NCSG list. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca Fri Oct 11 00:22:29 2019 From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 17:22:29 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_I?= =?utf-8?q?mprove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakeholder_Mo?= =?utf-8?q?del?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8B43F5FB-08A4-4C13-8AA5-C944FE23FF70@digitaldiscretion.ca> Of course the link would help..... Https://public-interest-tech.com Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 10, 2019, at 16:21, Elsa S wrote: > > I?ve taken the lead with Amr on the GPI comment, would anyone from the councilors be willing to take this on as pen holder? > > So many comments..!! > > E. > ? > >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:03 PM Rafik Dammak wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments for Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the google doc here >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit >> The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get draft and review it in NCSG list. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Oct 11 03:05:14 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:05:14 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_I?= =?utf-8?q?mprove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakeho?= =?utf-8?q?lder_Model?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: if there is volunteer, I will make request for late submission. Rafik Le ven. 11 oct. 2019 ? 05:28, Elsa S a ?crit : > I?ve taken the lead with Amr on the GPI comment, would anyone from the > councilors be willing to take this on as pen holder? > > So many comments..!! > > E. > ? > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 8:03 PM Rafik Dammak > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments >> for Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit >> comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the >> google doc here >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit >> The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get >> draft and review it in NCSG list. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > -- > -- > > Elsa Saade > Consultant > Gulf Centre for Human Rights > Twitter: @Elsa_Saade > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Fri Oct 11 20:31:53 2019 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:31:53 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] replacement for Elsa in Montreal Message-ID: Unfortunately it is not working out for Elsa to be in Montreal. We need to swap somebody in and make use of her travel slot. Suggestions welcome. I know that Sam Lanfranco was planning to come at his own expense, and is staying at the YMCA, so given that he has been kind enough to step in and look after the Finance Cttee for us (and by the looks of it will be stuck there for quite a while) his was the first bame that popped into my mind. Let me know right away Please. cheers Steph -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 05:22:16 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:22:16 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] For Council review: updated response to ICANN org re: WHOIS Accuracy and ARS In-Reply-To: <40CD98CB-B2A4-4E89-A00F-68271249BFE3@icann.org> References: <40CD98CB-B2A4-4E89-A00F-68271249BFE3@icann.org> Message-ID: hi all, any comment on the draft response from GNSO council on ARS? Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Caitlin Tubergen Date: ven. 11 oct. 2019 ? 01:56 Subject: [council] For Council review: updated response to ICANN org re: WHOIS Accuracy and ARS To: council at gnso.icann.org Dear Councilors, Attached, please find an updated draft of the response to ICANN org?s letter to the GNSO Council re: WHOIS accuracy and WHOIS ARS . Keith has reviewed this text with Darcy and Marie, who proposed the original text of the letter. Please review the letter and provide feedback and proposed edits (if any) by *COB Monday, 14 October*. Thank you. Best regards, Caitlin -- *Caitlin Tubergen* Policy Senior Manager - GNSO ICANN _______________________________________________ council mailing list council at gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Council Response to ICANN org Letter on Data Accuracy 09OCT2019 KCD CLEAN.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16363 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4620 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Oct 14 05:41:36 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:41:36 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?=5Burgent=5D_NCSG_Comment_on_Next_Steps_to_I?= =?utf-8?q?mprove_the_Effectiveness_of_ICANN=E2=80=99s_Multistakeho?= =?utf-8?q?lder_Model?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi all, there was some changes in current draft but we still need to do more. I asked for extension to give us another chance. I really expect you to jump in and help for the comment. Thanks. Best, Rafik Le mer. 9 oct. 2019 ? 09:02, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > Hi all, > > the drafting team didn't get to draft a comment on the public comments for > Brian Cute initiative. I understand that is something we have to submit > comments on. PC should support and help for drafting. you can find the > google doc here > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkWek-DpkXCZXOYOjpMeh9I3bq0I77ljY4bZanLvXe0/edit > The deadline for submission is the 14th Oct, so we got short time to get > draft and review it in NCSG list. > > Best, > > Rafik > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja Mon Oct 14 13:14:29 2019 From: aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja (Amr Elsadr) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 10:14:29 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] Fwd: [council] For Council review: updated response to ICANN org re: WHOIS Accuracy and ARS In-Reply-To: References: <40CD98CB-B2A4-4E89-A00F-68271249BFE3@icann.org> Message-ID: <16FB754B-4F14-44FC-BB02-013BB7835E5F@icannpolicy.ninja> Hi Rafik, Thanks for sharing this here. This is a pretty good draft response, IMO, and hope it isn?t amended by the IPC or BC. The only part that makes me slightly uncomfortable is this: ?Should ICANN org have any specific issues that you believe the EPDP Team should consider as it discusses data accuracy and impacts to the ARS, we invite you to bring these to the attention of the GNSO Council.? In the draft letter, the GNSO Council already very clearly explains why the topics of data accuracy and ARS should not be addressed by the EPDP, and yet is inviting the Board to propose specific issues on these two topics that it believes the EPDP does need to address. On the other hand, it might be telling to get an answer to that question, since the Board is now apparently anxious to have the GNSO conduct policy development on these two topics, having not addressed either of them itself when they came up with the Temporary Specification. Someone or something seems to have changed their thoughts on the topic (I wonder or what that could be); enough so that they would write to the GNSO Council with enquiries on how the topics will be handled. Another thought I have is that I do really wish the Council had shared these sentiments on data accuracy and the ARS back with the EPDP Team when it was discussing them in Phase 1. Would have saved the Team a great deal of time, and would have also likely not needed to deal with them as Priority 2 issues in Phase 2. Also, had this been settled during Phase 1, the topics might have not ended up in the Final Report for Phase 1, the Board would not have sent a letter to the Council with its enquiries, and the Council would not have needed to draft this response at all. ;-) Thanks again. Amr > On Oct 14, 2019, at 4:22 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > hi all, > > any comment on the draft response from GNSO council on ARS? > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > De : Caitlin Tubergen > Date: ven. 11 oct. 2019 ? 01:56 > Subject: [council] For Council review: updated response to ICANN org re: WHOIS Accuracy and ARS > To: council at gnso.icann.org > > Dear Councilors, > > Attached, please find an updated draft of the response to [ICANN org?s letter to the GNSO Council re: WHOIS accuracy and WHOIS ARS](https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/marby-to-drazek-21jun19-en.pdf). Keith has reviewed this text with Darcy and Marie, who proposed the original text of the letter. > > Please review the letter and provide feedback and proposed edits (if any) by COB Monday, 14 October. > > Thank you. > > Best regards, > > Caitlin > > -- > > Caitlin Tubergen > > Policy Senior Manager - GNSO > > ICANN > > _______________________________________________ > council mailing list > council at gnso.icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Tue Oct 15 17:00:00 2019 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (U Of T) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:00:00 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_Tr?= =?utf-8?q?avelers/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday=2C_07_Nov?= =?utf-8?q?ember_2019?= References: Message-ID: Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and start your planning now. Stephanie Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Terri Agnew > Date: October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT > To: Stephanie Perrin , Maryam Bakoshi > Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org" > Subject: ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019 > > ? > Dear all, > > In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to gnso-secs at icann.org by Thursday, 07 November 2019 in order to be submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. > > As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. > > A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the OFAC review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for confirmed reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. > > Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting funded traveler lists are due 120 days prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days prior). > > Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting: > Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. > Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. > Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in advance. > Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. > > > Please note: > GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please DO NOT book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. > All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of providing travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be processed in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org]. Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org. > > > Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the following into consideration: > > 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming travel. > 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel team to let them know you will need a visa. > 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa issues. > 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. > 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN meeting venue. > 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is Thursday, 19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020 > 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be done at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the ICANN hotel confirmation has be sent to them. > 8. Privately Booked Reservations: ICANN will not refund or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their reservation. > > Many thanks for your cooperation! > > With kind regards, > Terri > --- > Terri Agnew > Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > Email: terri.agnew at icann.org > Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann > > Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO > Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar > See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org] > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Tue Oct 15 17:12:41 2019 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 10:12:41 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_T?= =?utf-8?q?ravelers/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday?= =?utf-8?q?=2C_07_November_2019?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ill be there and don?t need a visa. Thank you On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:00 AM U Of T wrote: > > Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and > start your planning now. > Stephanie > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Terri Agnew > *Date:* October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT > *To:* Stephanie Perrin , Maryam > Bakoshi > *Cc:* "gnso-secs at icann.org" > *Subject:* *ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers > Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019* > > ? > > Dear all, > > > > In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely > fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to > gnso-secs at icann.org by *Thursday, 07 November 2019 *in order to be > submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. > > > > As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, > as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. > > > > A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the OFAC > review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for confirmed > reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. > > Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting *funded traveler lists are due 120 > days* prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days prior). > > > > *Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting:* > > - Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight > confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. > - Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their > visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > - Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa > (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > - Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. > - Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in > advance. > - Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with > Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. > > > > Please note: > > - GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation > funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please *DO NOT* > book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. > - All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of providing > travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be processed > in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org] > . > Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our > privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org. > > > > Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of > fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the > following into consideration: > > > > 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming > travel. > > 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make > sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel > team to let them know you will need a visa. > > 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by > case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day > deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel > as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa > issues. > > 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours > and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. > > 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN > meeting venue. > > 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is > *Thursday,* *19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020* > > 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be done > at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the ICANN > hotel confirmation has be sent to them. > > 8. *Privately Booked Reservations*: ICANN will not refund > or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a > replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel > their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their > reservation. > > > > Many thanks for your cooperation! > > > > With kind regards, > > *Terri* > > * ---* > > *Terri Agnew* > > Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > *Email:* terri.agnew at icann.org > > *Skype ID:* terri.agnew.icann > > > > Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ > > > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO > > > Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are > located on the GNSO Master Calendar > > > See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org] > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -- Farzaneh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Oct 15 17:16:50 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 23:16:50 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_T?= =?utf-8?q?ravelers/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday?= =?utf-8?q?=2C_07_November_2019?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Stephanie, Thanks I am planning to attend. Best, Rafik Le mar. 15 oct. 2019 ? 23:00, U Of T a ?crit : > > Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and > start your planning now. > Stephanie > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Terri Agnew > *Date:* October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT > *To:* Stephanie Perrin , Maryam > Bakoshi > *Cc:* "gnso-secs at icann.org" > *Subject:* *ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers > Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019* > > ? > > Dear all, > > > > In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely > fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to > gnso-secs at icann.org by *Thursday, 07 November 2019 *in order to be > submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. > > > > As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, > as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. > > > > A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the OFAC > review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for confirmed > reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. > > Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting *funded traveler lists are due 120 > days* prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days prior). > > > > *Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting:* > > - Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight > confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. > - Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their > visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > - Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa > (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. > - Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. > - Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in > advance. > - Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with > Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. > > > > Please note: > > - GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation > funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please *DO NOT* > book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. > - All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of providing > travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be processed > in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org] > . > Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our > privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org. > > > > Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of > fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the > following into consideration: > > > > 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming > travel. > > 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make > sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel > team to let them know you will need a visa. > > 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by > case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day > deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel > as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa > issues. > > 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours > and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. > > 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN > meeting venue. > > 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is > *Thursday,* *19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020* > > 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be done > at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the ICANN > hotel confirmation has be sent to them. > > 8. *Privately Booked Reservations*: ICANN will not refund > or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a > replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel > their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their > reservation. > > > > Many thanks for your cooperation! > > > > With kind regards, > > *Terri* > > * ---* > > *Terri Agnew* > > Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > *Email:* terri.agnew at icann.org > > *Skype ID:* terri.agnew.icann > > > > Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ > > > Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO > > > Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are > located on the GNSO Master Calendar > > > See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org] > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mpsilvavalent at gmail.com Tue Oct 15 17:19:36 2019 From: mpsilvavalent at gmail.com (Martin Pablo Silva Valent) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:19:36 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_Traveler?= =?utf-8?q?s/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday=2C_07_November_?= =?utf-8?q?2019?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Planning to attend, no need for visa. Best, Mart?n > On 15 Oct 2019, at 11:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi Stephanie, > > Thanks > I am planning to attend. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > Le mar. 15 oct. 2019 ? 23:00, U Of T > a ?crit : > > Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and start your planning now. > Stephanie > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Terri Agnew > >> Date: October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT >> To: Stephanie Perrin >, Maryam Bakoshi > >> Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org " > >> Subject: ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019 >> >> ? >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to gnso-secs at icann.org by Thursday, 07 November 2019 in order to be submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. >> >> >> >> As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. >> >> >> >> A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the OFAC review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for confirmed reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. >> >> Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting funded traveler lists are due 120 days prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days prior). >> >> >> >> Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting: >> >> Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. >> Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >> Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >> Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. >> Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in advance. >> Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. >> >> >> Please note: >> >> GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please DO NOT book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. >> All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of providing travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be processed in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org] . Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org . >> >> >> Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the following into consideration: >> >> >> >> 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming travel. >> >> 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel team to let them know you will need a visa. >> >> 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa issues. >> >> 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. >> >> 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN meeting venue. >> >> 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is Thursday, 19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020 >> >> 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be done at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the ICANN hotel confirmation has be sent to them. >> >> 8. Privately Booked Reservations: ICANN will not refund or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their reservation. >> >> >> >> Many thanks for your cooperation! >> >> >> >> With kind regards, >> >> Terri >> >> --- >> >> Terri Agnew >> >> Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> Email: terri.agnew at icann.org >> Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann >> >> >> >> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ >> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO >> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar >> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tatiana.tropina at gmail.com Tue Oct 15 17:25:23 2019 From: tatiana.tropina at gmail.com (Tatiana Tropina) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:25:23 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_Traveler?= =?utf-8?q?s/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday=2C_07_No?= =?utf-8?q?vember_2019?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you, Steph. I am planning to attend, too. No visa needed. Cheers, Tanya On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 16:19, Martin Pablo Silva Valent < mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote: > Planning to attend, no need for visa. > > Best, > Mart?n > > On 15 Oct 2019, at 11:16, Rafik Dammak wrote: > > Hi Stephanie, > > Thanks > I am planning to attend. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > Le mar. 15 oct. 2019 ? 23:00, U Of T > a ?crit : > >> >> Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and >> start your planning now. >> Stephanie >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From:* Terri Agnew >> *Date:* October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT >> *To:* Stephanie Perrin , Maryam >> Bakoshi >> *Cc:* "gnso-secs at icann.org" >> *Subject:* *ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers >> Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019* >> >> ? >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely >> fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to >> gnso-secs at icann.org by *Thursday, 07 November 2019 *in order to be >> submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. >> >> >> >> As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, >> as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. >> >> >> >> A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the >> OFAC review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for >> confirmed reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. >> >> Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting *funded traveler lists are due >> 120 days* prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days >> prior). >> >> >> >> *Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting:* >> >> - Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight >> confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. >> - Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their >> visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >> - Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa >> (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >> - Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. >> - Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in >> advance. >> - Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with >> Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. >> >> >> >> Please note: >> >> - GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation >> funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please *DO >> NOT* book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. >> - All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of >> providing travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be >> processed in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org] >> . >> Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our >> privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org. >> >> >> >> Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of >> fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the >> following into consideration: >> >> >> >> 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming >> travel. >> >> 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make >> sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel >> team to let them know you will need a visa. >> >> 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by >> case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day >> deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel >> as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa >> issues. >> >> 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours >> and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. >> >> 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN >> meeting venue. >> >> 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is >> *Thursday,* *19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020* >> >> 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be >> done at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the >> ICANN hotel confirmation has be sent to them. >> >> 8. *Privately Booked Reservations*: ICANN will not refund >> or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a >> replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel >> their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their >> reservation. >> >> >> >> Many thanks for your cooperation! >> >> >> >> With kind regards, >> >> *Terri* >> >> * ---* >> >> *Terri Agnew* >> >> Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> *Email:* terri.agnew at icann.org >> >> *Skype ID:* terri.agnew.icann >> >> >> >> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ >> >> >> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO >> >> >> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are >> located on the GNSO Master Calendar >> >> >> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar >> [features.icann.org] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farell at benin2point0.org Tue Oct 15 23:06:21 2019 From: farell at benin2point0.org (Farell FOLLY) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 22:06:21 +0200 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?ICANN67_=7C_Canc=C3=BAn_-_Supported_Traveler?= =?utf-8?q?s/Contractor_Travelers_Database_Due_//_Thursday=2C_07_November_?= =?utf-8?q?2019?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04C6466C-DFDB-45C3-8316-2EC7BE1F230B@benin2point0.org> Dear Stephanie, There is no conflict so far in my agenda. I am planning to attend, too. @__f_f__ Best Regards ____________________________________ (Ekue) Farell FOLLY NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee linkedin.com/in/farellf > On 15 Oct 2019, at 16:25, Tatiana Tropina wrote: > > Thank you, Steph. I am planning to attend, too. No visa needed. > Cheers, > Tanya > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 16:19, Martin Pablo Silva Valent > wrote: > Planning to attend, no need for visa. > > Best, > Mart?n > >> On 15 Oct 2019, at 11:16, Rafik Dammak > wrote: >> >> Hi Stephanie, >> >> Thanks >> I am planning to attend. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> Le mar. 15 oct. 2019 ? 23:00, U Of T > a ?crit : >> >> Incoming councillors, please note the travel deadlines for cancun and start your planning now. >> Stephanie >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Terri Agnew > >>> Date: October 14, 2019 at 18:01:44 EDT >>> To: Stephanie Perrin >, Maryam Bakoshi > >>> Cc: "gnso-secs at icann.org " > >>> Subject: ICANN67 | Canc?n - Supported Travelers/Contractor Travelers Database Due // Thursday, 07 November 2019 >>> >>> ? >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> >>> In order to service your travel needs for ICANN67 in Canc?n in a timely fashion, please submit your ICANN67 Meeting database to gnso-secs at icann.org by Thursday, 07 November 2019 in order to be submitted by deadline of 08 November 2019. >>> >>> >>> >>> As a reminder, for the AGM meeting only, incoming Councilors get funding, as well as the then-incumbent Councilors. >>> >>> >>> >>> A timely response would be appreciated in view of visa issues and the OFAC review. The deadline for submissions is critical to allow for confirmed reservation numbers as required for visa and travel arrangements. >>> >>> Moving forward, all tri-annual meeting funded traveler lists are due 120 days prior to the next ICANN meeting. (This was formerly 90 days prior). >>> >>> >>> >>> Benefits of having the list 120 Days Before the Meeting: >>> >>> Allow ICANN to gather the documentation required (hotel and flight confirmations) for funded travelers to apply for their visa. >>> Allow enough time for funded travelers to complete and submit their visa application, which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >>> Allow enough time for funded travelers to apply for a transit visa (if required), which often vary per ICANN Meeting location. >>> Allow ICANN to purchase less expensive airfares. >>> Allow the travelers to plan their pre-and-post Meeting Travel in advance. >>> Allow ICANN to set-up funded travelers in advance as vendors with Finance allowing us to wire their per diem funds in a timelier manner. >>> >>> >>> Please note: >>> >>> GNSO supported traveler with a designated hotel accommodation funding, a hotel room is automatically secured for you, please DO NOT book your own hotel as it is un-reimbursable. >>> All personal data provided to ICANN org in for purposes of providing travel support for participants related to ICANN events will be processed in accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy [icann.org] . Should you have any questions or concerns about this Privacy Policy and our privacy practices, you may contact us at privacy at icann.org . >>> >>> >>> Please note that when requesting travel support, in the interest of fairness and in light of budget restrictions we would like you to take the following into consideration: >>> >>> >>> >>> 1. Respond timely to ICANN Travel regarding your upcoming travel. >>> >>> 2. If you require a visa to enter the country, please make sure to acquire your visa immediately. Please contact the ICANN travel team to let them know you will need a visa. >>> >>> 3. Requests past the deadline will be handled on a case by case basis by ICANN. All additional travelers added after the 90-day deadline are subject to availability, may NOT be placed in the same hotel as their funded traveler groups, and may not be able to attend due to visa issues. >>> >>> 4. If possible please book direct travel requests. Detours and multi-stop trips are unfortunately not guaranteed. >>> >>> 5. Strictly limit your travel from your home to the ICANN meeting venue. >>> >>> 6. Approved date of arrival/departure for this meeting is Thursday, 19 March 2020 ? Thursday, 26 March 2020 >>> >>> 7. If travelers want to extend their stay this must be done at their own expense and should contact the hotel directly once the ICANN hotel confirmation has be sent to them. >>> >>> 8. Privately Booked Reservations: ICANN will not refund or take over accommodations directly booked by the funded traveler. If a replacement has an existing hotel reservation, they will need to cancel their reservation and ICANN will not be able to take over their reservation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Many thanks for your cooperation! >>> >>> >>> >>> With kind regards, >>> >>> Terri >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Terri Agnew >>> >>> Operations Support - GNSO Lead Administrator >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> Email: terri.agnew at icann.org >>> Skype ID: terri.agnew.icann >>> >>> >>> >>> Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ >>> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO >>> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar >>> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From icann at ferdeline.com Thu Oct 17 01:08:10 2019 From: icann at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 22:08:10 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fw: [Gnso-sc-budget] SCBO - 2019-2020 Cycle Begins and Next Steps In-Reply-To: <001101d5846d$05020da0$0f0628e0$@bacinblack.com> References: <001101d5846d$05020da0$0f0628e0$@bacinblack.com> Message-ID: Hi all, I realise that I have voluntarily suspended my participation in ICANN activities on behalf of the NCSG, and have said that I would not be emailing the lists, but I think it important I forward the below message along as there are some action items for the NCSG. This is a very productive Standing Committee and I do hope that the NCSG will continue to participate in it fully. I hope this might be added to the agenda for the next Policy Committee call -- while I was not planning to dial in, I can if anyone would like to learn more about what this Standing Committee does and why NCSG involvement is so crucial. Alternatively you can write to me off-list and I will elaborate. Thanks. Best wishes, Ayden ??????? Original Message ??????? On Wednesday, 16 October 2019 23:59, wrote: > Dear SCBO Team, > > I hope you enjoyed the small break away from activities related to ICANN?s budget and strategic planning in regards to the GNSO Council. The break, though, is now over and this email is intended to restart momentum. > > You will have seen a separate email with the announcement that the IANA/PTI FY21 budget cycle has begun. If you look back on the GNSO Council?s [Project List](https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/projects-list-14oct19-en.pdf) (towards the bottom of the PDF), the SCBO has completed a fair amount of work over the past few years, including the earlier days prior to this group being formally chartered by the GNSO Council in early 2018. The ?Completed in Prior Period? section of the Project List contains links to prior comments developed in contribution to public comment proceedings. > > Below is a summary of activities ahead of the SCBO. > > Renewed Call for Volunteers (CfV): > > - Shortly, staff will send a notice to the GNSO Council asking for current members to confirm their continued participation on the SCBO and to extend an invitation to the new incoming Councilors. The [SCBO roster](https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/74580769/SCBO%20Roster%20-%20WG-2019-08-18-11-46-02.pdf?version=2&modificationDate=1566155512000&api=v2) currently shows coverage across the SGs and Cs, although not in true form as defined in the [charter](https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/74580767/gnso-council-budget-charter_v1.1.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1540727828000&api=v2). > - In parallel, staff will send a CfV notice to the SG/C Leaders asking them to confirm their respective SME?s continued participation or to put forward new persons interested in representing their respective group. > - I?m not expecting a large change to our current roster, but this level of confirmation is required as part of the charter and hopefully we find some new interest. > - Note: any SME members presently on the roster that are not (re)confirmed by their respective SG/C Leadership a short time after ICANN66 will be converted to ?Observer? on the SCBO roster and mailing list. > > Need for a new SCBO Chair: > > - First, staff would like to extend our gratitude and appreciation to Ayden for his Chair leadership over the last two years. As you likely know, his term on the Council will conclude in Montreal and he can no longer serve in this role. If you reviewed any of the past activities from the Project List above, Ayden helped manage each one of them. He should also be considered a foundational member of the SCBO that helped transform this responsibility of the Council from an ad-hoc and reactive nature to one of being proactive and more predictable. We do hope he continues his participation as a SME representing the NCSG. > - For those Council members who remain, is there interest in taking over this role? > - The role of Chair is limited only to Council members, so those here whose term will continue in the 2019-2020 session should start to consider if they have available bandwidth and interest to take this on. The most active period is typically from now until March of the following year. For this cycle, the SCBO will likely also assist again with the conclusion of the five year strategic plan (5YSP) in addition to the FY21 budget and operating plan. Therefore, we expect it will be a bit more active than what normally transpired in prior fiscal years. That said, we do have a stronger cadence in reviewing financial and operations materials in preparation of drafts for the GNSO Council. > > CCNSO Session with SOPC at ICANN66: > > - You will recall we had a joint session with the CCNSO?s SOPC back in July 2019 where the primary topic focused more on the 5YSP. This was an attempt to increase collaboration between the two SOs as part of larger mormentum to enhance collaboration on other topics of interest between the two Supporting Organizations. > - To continue collaboration in the budget and operations arena, the CCNSO has extended an invitation to the SCBO in Montreal; scheduled for Sunday, 3 Novmeber at 13:30 to 16:16. The first half of their session will engage with ICANN?s Finance team and discussion of their budget and strategic planning efforts. I anticipate it to be a more involved session than what the GNSO Council morning session with ICANN Finance will have time for. Unfortunately though, the SOPC time conflicts with the GNSO Council?s draft agenda for Sunday and the SOPC is aware of this conflict. I have committed to be there for the first half of their session and I?m hopeful that we can find at least one Councilor to also make an appearance. Aspirationaly, that someone would be the new SCBO Chair, if we can find interest in the role quickly enough. SCBO SME?s are also encouraged to attend the SOPC session. Further information can be found on the schedule of the meetings page: https://66.schedule.icann.org/meetings/1116949. > - Once topic of discussion is that the SOPC?s charter allows it to appoint a liasion for collaboration of budget and oerations topics with other SO/AC groups. The SCBO should consider this option of continued collaborabion in the near future. An excerpt from the SOPC charter, ?The Chair of the SOPC may invite other supporting organisations and advisory committees or constituencies to appoint liaisons (maximum two per SO/AC), in accordance with their own rules and procedures. These liaisons participate on an equal footing in the deliberations and sessions of the SOPC. However, if explicitly requested by the Chair, liaisons shall not participate in the process of seeking out and fostering participation and input from ccTLD managers and providing regular feedback to the ccNSO on the strategic and operational planning processes, nor in preparing a relevant Rejection Action Petition.? > > Please start to work with your respective leadership groups in preparation for the renewed Call for Volunteers. If you think you are interested in taking on the Chair role, please express intest to the mailing list or sound off with a nomination of an interested candidate. > > Thank you. > > B > > Berry Cobb > > @berrycobb > > GNSO Policy Consultant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Oct 18 16:27:54 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 22:27:54 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Renewed Call for Volunteers - SCBO - 2019-2020 Cycle Begins and Next Steps In-Reply-To: <01e601d585b2$e7f120b0$b7d36210$@bacinblack.com> References: <01e601d585b2$e7f120b0$b7d36210$@bacinblack.com> Message-ID: Hi all, we have a new task to confirm/appoint SME (we only have Stephanie as SME) to SCBO . Councillors are encouraged to join directly the SCBO. I will check the last year call for volunteers, update it and share it here. Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Date: ven. 18 oct. 2019 ? 22:15 Subject: [council] Renewed Call for Volunteers - SCBO - 2019-2020 Cycle Begins and Next Steps To: Dear GNSO Council, Please refer to a next steps email below that was sent recently to the SCBO (Standing Committee on ICANN?s Budget and Operations). It provides a quick overview of what the standing committee has accomplished, changes upon us, and a short description of what is ahead of us as ICANN org and ICANN community transition to the next Five-Year Strategic Plan (5YSP) along with the more tactical Fiscal Year 2021 ICANN Budget and Operating plan. As you are aware, the Annual General Meeting in the coming weeks means we will have several new Councilors joining us. We welcome their participation in GNSO Council activities and operation. As a part of the SCBO Charter , this email acts as a call for volunteers to Councilors that may be interested in the financial and planning aspects within ICANN?s annual budget and operations. If you are not already a member of the SCBO and interested in these topics in general or in collaboration of your groups position on budget and operations in the context of the GNSO Council?s remit as managers of the policy development process, an email should be sent to the GNSO Secretariat at gnso-secs at icann.org. They will enroll you to the group and notify you after doing so. For those Councilors already established as a member , you do not need to take any action. Lastly as noted below, we greatly appreciate Ayden for his Chair services over the years as his term ends in Montreal. Therefore, we need to find a new Chair for the SCBO and this role is limited to Council members only. If you are interested, please nominate a candidate or yourself on the SCBO mailing list for the group?s consideration. Thank you for your attention. B Berry Cobb @berrycobb GNSO Policy Consultant *From:* Gnso-sc-budget *On Behalf Of * policy at bacinblack.com *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2019 18:00 *To:* gnso-sc-budget at icann.org *Subject:* [Gnso-sc-budget] SCBO - 2019-2020 Cycle Begins and Next Steps Dear SCBO Team, I hope you enjoyed the small break away from activities related to ICANN?s budget and strategic planning in regards to the GNSO Council. The break, though, is now over and this email is intended to restart momentum. You will have seen a separate email with the announcement that the IANA/PTI FY21 budget cycle has begun. If you look back on the GNSO Council?s Project List (towards the bottom of the PDF), the SCBO has completed a fair amount of work over the past few years, including the earlier days prior to this group being formally chartered by the GNSO Council in early 2018. The ?Completed in Prior Period? section of the Project List contains links to prior comments developed in contribution to public comment proceedings. Below is a summary of activities ahead of the SCBO. *Renewed Call for Volunteers (CfV):* 1. Shortly, staff will send a notice to the GNSO Council asking for current members to confirm their continued participation on the SCBO and to extend an invitation to the new incoming Councilors. The SCBO roster currently shows coverage across the SGs and Cs, although not in true form as defined in the charter . 2. In parallel, staff will send a CfV notice to the SG/C Leaders asking them to confirm their respective SME?s continued participation or to put forward new persons interested in representing their respective group. 3. I?m not expecting a large change to our current roster, but this level of confirmation is required as part of the charter and hopefully we find some new interest. 4. Note: any SME members presently on the roster that are not (re)confirmed by their respective SG/C Leadership a short time after ICANN66 will be converted to ?Observer? on the SCBO roster and mailing list. *Need for a new SCBO Chair:* - First, staff would like to extend our gratitude and appreciation to Ayden for his Chair leadership over the last two years. As you likely know, his term on the Council will conclude in Montreal and he can no longer serve in this role. If you reviewed any of the past activities from the Project List above, Ayden helped manage each one of them. He should also be considered a foundational member of the SCBO that helped transform this responsibility of the Council from an ad-hoc and reactive nature to one of being proactive and more predictable. We do hope he continues his participation as a SME representing the NCSG. - *For those Council members who remain, is there interest in taking over this role*? - The role of Chair is limited only to Council members, so those here whose term will continue in the 2019-2020 session should start to consider if they have available bandwidth and interest to take this on. The most active period is typically from now until March of the following year. For this cycle, the SCBO will likely also assist again with the conclusion of the five year strategic plan (5YSP) in addition to the FY21 budget and operating plan. Therefore, we expect it will be a bit more active than what normally transpired in prior fiscal years. That said, we do have a stronger cadence in reviewing financial and operations materials in preparation of drafts for the GNSO Council. *CCNSO Session with SOPC at ICANN66:* - You will recall we had a joint session with the CCNSO?s SOPC back in July 2019 where the primary topic focused more on the 5YSP. This was an attempt to increase collaboration between the two SOs as part of larger mormentum to enhance collaboration on other topics of interest between the two Supporting Organizations. - To continue collaboration in the budget and operations arena, *the CCNSO has extended an invitation to the SCBO in Montreal; scheduled for Sunday, 3 Novmeber at 13:30 to 16:16*. The first half of their session will engage with ICANN?s Finance team and discussion of their budget and strategic planning efforts. I anticipate it to be a more involved session than what the GNSO Council morning session with ICANN Finance will have time for. Unfortunately though, the SOPC time conflicts with the GNSO Council?s draft agenda for Sunday and the SOPC is aware of this conflict. I have committed to be there for the first half of their session and I?m hopeful that we can find *at least one Councilor to also make an appearance*. Aspirationaly, that someone would be the new SCBO Chair, if we can find interest in the role quickly enough. SCBO SME?s are also encouraged to attend the SOPC session. Further information can be found on the schedule of the meetings page: https://66.schedule.icann.org/meetings/1116949. - Once topic of discussion is that the *SOPC?s charter allows it to appoint a liasion for collaboration of budget and oerations topics with other SO/AC groups*. The SCBO should consider this option of continued collaborabion in the near future. An excerpt from the SOPC charter, ?*The Chair of the SOPC may invite other supporting organisations and advisory committees or constituencies to appoint liaisons (maximum two per SO/AC), in accordance with their own rules and procedures. These liaisons participate on an equal footing in the deliberations and sessions of the SOPC. However, if explicitly requested by the Chair, liaisons shall not participate in the process of seeking out and fostering participation and input from ccTLD managers and providing regular feedback to the ccNSO on the strategic and operational planning processes, nor in preparing a relevant Rejection Action Petition.*? Please start to work with your respective leadership groups in preparation for the renewed Call for Volunteers. If you think you are interested in taking on the Chair role, please express intest to the mailing list or sound off with a nomination of an interested candidate. Thank you. B Berry Cobb @berrycobb GNSO Policy Consultant _______________________________________________ council mailing list council at gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Oct 18 16:34:23 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 22:34:23 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] heads-up about SSC Message-ID: Hi all, as we are close to AGM, it is the season for the renewal of several committees. I just sent about SCBO appointments. Another one to cover is the SSC (GNSO Selection Standing Committee). we have 3 members there: Sam Lanfranco , Johan Helsingius and Poncelet Ileleji . My understanding is that Poncelet is term limited and should be replaced. We can confirm/appoint representatives. We should start such process soon. One way is to reach the current members and checking if they are interested to continue. We will have a call for candidates anyway. A communication from GNSO secretariat will be sent soon. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Oct 21 02:51:21 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 08:51:21 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Draft Agenda for NCSG Monthly Policy Call 23rd October In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi all I am sharing here the NCSG Policy call draft agenda scheduled in Wednesday 23rd October. There are several items for discussions and material to review such as new templates and guidelines related to EC. Everyone needs to prepare for the policy call and GNSO council. Please review and feel free to suggest addition/amendment to the agenda. I. Introduction II. GNSO Council Call Preparation - Council agenda: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/agenda/agenda-council-24oct19-en.pdf III. Policy Update - Policy topics: * PDPs & Review Teams Update : EPDP, Subpro, RPM - Public comments status: https://www.icann.org/public-comments#open-public & list of volunteers https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2019 IV. Others - Montreal Meeting / NCSG plan Best Regards, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carlosraul at gutierrez.se Tue Oct 22 15:39:42 2019 From: carlosraul at gutierrez.se (Carlos Raul Gutierrez) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 06:39:42 -0600 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Draft Agenda for NCSG Monthly Policy Call 23rd October In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4c70e48e05c9901cb0bd176e84334af5@gutierrez.se> Thanks for the Agenda Rafik. Please confirm the time and id for the call tomorrow. Cheers --- Carlos Ra?l Guti?rrez carlosraul at gutierrez.se +506 8837 7176 Aparatado 1571-1000 COSTA RICA El 2019-10-20 17:51, Rafik Dammak escribi?: > hi all > > I am sharing here the NCSG Policy call draft agenda scheduled in Wednesday 23rd October. > > There are several items for discussions and material to review such as new templates and guidelines related to EC. Everyone needs to prepare for the policy call and GNSO council. Please review and feel free to suggest addition/amendment to the agenda. > > I. Introduction > II. GNSO Council Call Preparation > > * Council agenda: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/agenda/agenda-council-24oct19-en.pdf > > III. Policy Update > > - Policy topics: > > * PDPs & Review Teams Update : EPDP, Subpro, RPM > - Public comments status: https://www.icann.org/public-comments#open-public & list of volunteers https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2019 > > IV. Others > - Montreal Meeting / NCSG plan > > Best Regards, > > Rafik > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Oct 22 17:27:08 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 23:27:08 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Draft Agenda for NCSG Monthly Policy Call 23rd October In-Reply-To: <4c70e48e05c9901cb0bd176e84334af5@gutierrez.se> References: <4c70e48e05c9901cb0bd176e84334af5@gutierrez.se> Message-ID: Hi Carlos, it is Wednesday 11:00UTC. Maryam will resend the invite. Best, Rafik Le mar. 22 oct. 2019 ? 21:39, Carlos Raul Gutierrez a ?crit : > Thanks for the Agenda Rafik. Please confirm the time and id for the call > tomorrow. > > > Cheers > --- > Carlos Ra?l Guti?rrez > carlosraul at gutierrez.se > +506 8837 7176 > Aparatado 1571-1000 > COSTA RICA > > > > El 2019-10-20 17:51, Rafik Dammak escribi?: > > hi all > > I am sharing here the NCSG Policy call draft agenda scheduled in Wednesday > 23rd October. > > There are several items for discussions and material to review such as new > templates and guidelines related to EC. Everyone needs to prepare for the > policy call and GNSO council. Please review and feel free to suggest > addition/amendment to the agenda. > > I. Introduction > II. GNSO Council Call Preparation > > - Council agenda: > https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2019/agenda/agenda-council-24oct19-en.pdf > > III. Policy Update > - Policy topics: > * PDPs & Review Teams Update : EPDP, Subpro, RPM > - Public comments status: > https://www.icann.org/public-comments#open-public & list of volunteers > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2019 > > > IV. Others > - Montreal Meeting / NCSG plan > > Best Regards, > > Rafik > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Oct 24 04:50:54 2019 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:50:54 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG PC Agenda for Montreal meeting Message-ID: Hi all, I am sending here the draft agenda for PC session in Montreal. Nothing unusual knowing we have limited time 90 or 75 minute. Please chime in and share your thought. I will ask Maryam to post this draft in the meeting schedule just as it is a requirement but we will tweak it. 1- introduction & confirm agenda 2- GNSO Council agenda: highlights and discuss important topics 3- Policy Updates :PDP WG and RT, any update from sessions (Council, PDPs, Plenary) on Montreal 4- Wrap-up: discuss any next steps Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Thu Oct 31 23:33:14 2019 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:33:14 -0700 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Not attending ICANN66 In-Reply-To: <9413F4BB-778A-4DD2-A698-BAB101D7B19B@icann.org> References: <9413F4BB-778A-4DD2-A698-BAB101D7B19B@icann.org> Message-ID: Hey all, I got an email from Nathalie about this. I will not be able to attend (might join remotely for the council meeting only to observe), but I?d like us to finalize who will be my proxy for votes? I would appreciate your input asap before I send in my reply. Thanks all in advance, Elsa ? ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Nathalie Peregrine Date: Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:04 AM Subject: Not attending ICANN66 To: Syed Ismail Shah , Elsa S < elsa.saade at gmail.com>, Darcy Southwell CC: gnso-secs at icann.org Dear Darcy, Elsa and Syed, We?re all pretty unhappy you aren?t making it to ICANN66, whilst understanding why! ? In order to ensure we can assist you as best we can, would you mind replying to the below: - Do you plan to attend sessions remotely, if yes, which ones? - Are you assigning a proxy (fellow councilor) or temporary alternate for either the GNSO Council meeting or the duration of ICANN66? If so, please get a SG/C officer to fill in the abstention form with the exact dates needed: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/abstention-notification-form-en.htm Thank you! And please reach out to gnso-secs at icann.org or Skype Terri or me, as we will be onsite. Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine at icann.org Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: