[NCSG-SubPro] NCSG Response to the proposed GAC-GNSO Consultation on Closed Generics
Kathy Kleiman
Kathy at KathyKleiman.com
Wed Apr 13 18:59:51 EEST 2022
Hi Manju,
Great letter and great edits by Bruna. I edited a few small things and
then pulled out and expanded our "ask" - that we would like the GNSO
Council to hold a comment period to provide input and guidance to this
small group of individuals appointed to talk to the GAC (should our
excellent and well-founded objections to the process be overruled).
This will provide a way for the GNSO Council to know the
issues/concerns/hopes o the GNSO Community on this matter - and to
provide clear input and guidance to the the small Committee for the
negotiations that may lie ahead.
Here's the paragraph - building on opening sentences of Manju and edits
of Bruna:
We strongly support as the first step that the GNSO Council seek public
comment from the community on how to proceed with Closed Generics, as
opposed to having a ‘closed dialogue’ with the GAC where the scope and
interlocutors of such dialogue is dictated by the ICANN Board. This
input will provide the Council with issues and concerns of the GNSO
Community. The Council, in turn, can provide guidance to the members of
the Council who will be leading this discussion - should it occur
despite our deep concerns for Multistakeholder process and precedent.
How else will this small team - some with very, very long-held personal
views on the subject - be bound to a discussion on behalf of the entire
GNSO Community?
I recommend putting the paragraph in bold for those who tend to scan
their email.
Best, Kathy
On 4/11/2022 11:04 PM, 陳曼茹 Manju Chen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As discussed per yesterday's policy call, I've drafted our formal
> response to be sent to the Council (and the Board?)
>
> You can find the statement here:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1buufalOjubifqZJoPLqF4wBaIUxHKLWor7NvILtnrKg/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Feedbacks and suggestions are welcome and will be highly appreciated!
>
>
> Best,
> Manju
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 10:22 AM 陳曼茹 Manju Chen <manju at nii.org.tw>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Tomslin and all,
>
> Kurt and others obviously wanted it to be discussed in the Council
> meeting this week.
> Steve has suggested if that was the intent we could propose a late
> motion. I think NCSG is not in a hurry about this, so I'll let
> others handle it if they want to propose the motion.
>
> I can share more details and answer questions today later during
> our policy call.
>
> Best,
> Manju
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 4:08 AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar
> <mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Manju,
> Thank you so much for the update. Nice strategy there with the
> small team representation. Do you know when that deferral will
> be brought to the council's attention? Or maybe I missed it in
> my hundreds of emails.
>
> Thanks again.
> Tomslin
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 at 08:18, 陳曼茹 Manju Chen <manju at nii.org.tw>
> wrote:
>
> Hi team,
>
> Borrowing this thread to report back to you about what
> happened in the small team.
>
> So as you might have guessed, I was the only one saying no
> to the 'facilitated dialogue'. Jeff, Paul, and Kurt were
> eager to dive into the discussion of how we engage with
> GAC in this 'facilitated dialogue' but thankfully they
> still respected our objection. My first point of objection
> is that the small team is really not representative enough
> to make the decision of whether the Council should meet
> with the GAC. For now, we agreed to refer this back to the
> Council and make the decision at the Council level.
>
> I'm afraid though NCSG would be the only one saying no
> when we're at the Council level. Also when this pops up,
> we really have to have our statement ready explaining why
> we're saying no. I've put notes in the document Tomslin
> created and Kathy has been extremely helpful by providing
> reference material and edits:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1buufalOjubifqZJoPLqF4wBaIUxHKLWor7NvILtnrKg/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> We will still need to phrase them into a formal statement,
> but I think it'd be an easy task now we have all the
> contents.
>
> Best,
> Manju
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 9:08 AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar
> <mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi team,
>
> I just wanted to call your attention to this response
> we promised to put together on the board proposed
> dialogue between GAC and Council on closed generics.
> The Council small team is about to be activated to
> start deliberations and I believe @陳曼茹 Manju Chen
> <mailto:manju at nii.org.tw> who is representing us there
> hopes to rely on the response we pen down to guide her
> contribution to that team.
>
> In this regard, can I request that we find some time
> to please put our ideas down on the Google
> formhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1buufalOjubifqZJoPLqF4wBaIUxHKLWor7NvILtnrKg/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Looking forward to your help with this. In the
> meantime, i'll review my meeting notes and put down
> some feedback we got during our policy call on the
> document.
>
> Warmly,
> Tomslin
>
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022, 22:25 Tomslin Samme-Nlar,
> <mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> As a follow-up to my previous email regarding the
> board's proposed facilitated dialogue between GAC
> and GNSO council, I have created this Google doc [
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1buufalOjubifqZJoPLqF4wBaIUxHKLWor7NvILtnrKg/edit?usp=sharing
> ] to capture our response to this proposal in the
> form of a letter to the council small team on
> Closed Generics.
>
> Inputs to the document are welcomed and for your
> convenience, attached again is the letter from the
> board and the accompanying framing paper.
>
> Regards,
> Tomslin
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 at 08:12, Tomslin Samme-Nlar
> <mesumbeslin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear everyone,
>
> Here is the framing paper on the board's
> proposed dialogue between GNSO Council and the
> GAC on Closed Generics that was promised.
>
> Comments are welcomed. I will also be sending
> a separate email with a link to the Google doc
> where we intend to draft a letter as a
> response to this.
>
> Regards,
> Tomslin
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Wendy Profit via Gnso-chairs*
> <gnso-chairs at icann.org>
> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 04:33
> Subject: [gnso-chairs] [CORRESPONDENCE]
> Maarten Botterman to Manal Ismail and Philippe
> Fouquart - GAC-GNSO Consultation on Closed
> Generics
> To: manal.ismail at board.icann.org
> <manal.ismail at board.icann.org>, Manal Ismail
> <manal at tra.gov.eg>,
> philippe.fouquart at orange.com
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>,
> gnso-chairs at icann.org <gnso-chairs at icann.org>
> Cc: Secretary <secretary at icann.org>,
> Correspondence <Correspondence at icann.org>,
> Board Ops Team <board-ops-team at icann.org>,
> gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>,
> GACSTAFF <gac-staff at icann.org>, Maarten
> Botterman <maarten.botterman at board.icann.org>
>
>
> Dear Manal and Philippe,
>
> Pursuant to the letter sent recently (6 March
> 2022, attached for reference), we are now
> forwarding the associated framework paper
> entitled “Board-Facilitated Process for a GAC
> - GNSO Council Dialogue on Closed Generics”,
> also attached.
>
> **
>
> Thank you and best regards,
>
> Wendy Profit
>
> ICANN
>
> Board Operations Senior Manager
>
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>
> Los Angeles, CA 90094
>
> *From: *Wendy Profit <wendy.profit at icann.org>
> *Date: *Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 3:58 PM
> *To: *"manal.ismail at board.icann.org"
> <manal.ismail at board.icann.org>,
> "manal at tra.gov.eg" <manal at tra.gov.eg>,
> "philippe.fouquart at orange.com"
> <philippe.fouquart at orange.com>
> *Cc: *Maarten Botterman
> <maarten.botterman at board.icann.org>,
> "gnso-chairs at icann.org"
> <gnso-chairs at icann.org>, GACSTAFF
> <gac-staff at icann.org>, "gnso-secs at icann.org"
> <gnso-secs at icann.org>, ICANN Board Ops
> <board-ops-team at icann.org>, Correspondence
> <Correspondence at icann.org>, Secretary
> <secretary at icann.org>
> *Subject: *[CORRESPONDENCE] Maarten Botterman
> to Manal Ismail and Philippe Fouquart -
> GAC-GNSO Consultation on Closed Generics
>
> Dear Manal and Philippe,
>
> Please find the attached letter from ICANN
> Chair Maarten Botterman regarding a proposed
> formal consultation between the GAC and GNSO
> Council on how to handle the subject of closed
> generics in gTLD applications.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
>
> Wendy Profit
>
> ICANN
>
> Board Operations Senior Manager
>
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>
> Los Angeles, CA 90094
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-chairs mailing list
> Gnso-chairs at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-chairs
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-subpro/attachments/20220413/69dfb157/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the NCSG-SubPro
mailing list