[NCSG-SubPro] NCSG Response to the proposed GAC-GNSO Consultation on Closed Generics

Fri Apr 22 05:30:06 EEST 2022

Hi all,

Thought it's worth it to report back to you that our objection to the
dialogue was acknowledged but brushed aside by the Council chair.
I would be optimistic and say that we still have many chances to voice our
opinions during the latter process, the first step being broadening the
dialogue to include more stakeholders within the GNSO, not limited to
Councilors.

Attached is the Council's draft response to the Board. There are
discussions going on about whether the NCSG's letter of objection should be
included in the response.

My personal opinion is opt-out of being included in the Council's response
and send our letter to the Board ourselves. But I'd like to know what you
think.

Council plans to send out the response by the Board Workshop next week so
we'll have to respond before April 27th 1200 UTC (Wednesday).

Any suggestions are welcome!

Best,
Manju

On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 7:38 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> I think the argument that will be used to respond to the idea of public
> comment is : councillors are representing their SG/C and are supposed to
> bring their input.
>
> Moreover in more practical matter, we are raising issues about discussing
> this issue with GAC but public comment means another group like ALAC would
> be involved.  Any wider discussion should be then done within PDP and not
> through ad-hoc approach. I can see there might be some possible alignment
> with ALAC in the topic (just an assumption) but I would object to open the
> door just for tactical gain.
>
> If we fail to stop the process, the next step would be to discuss the
> rules of engagement and scope for any discussion.
>
> Best.
>
> Rafik
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 00:59 Kathy Kleiman via NCSG-SubPro <
> ncsg-subpro at lists.ncsg.is> wrote:
>
>> 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 <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 form
>>>>>> https://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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>> NCSG-SubPro mailing list
>> NCSG-SubPro at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-subpro
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-subpro/attachments/20220422/d4741eb5/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Closed Generics_Council to ICANN Board - 20 April 2022.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 7074 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-subpro/attachments/20220422/d4741eb5/attachment-0001.docx>