<html><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-15"><META name="Author" content="Novell GroupWise WebAccess"></head><body style='font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; '>I agree. The SCI is the proper place to review the process issue, both as to how to handle the resubmission of a previously-defeated motion (on whatever basis) as well as the question of whether current GNSO rules and procedures properly govern the conflict of interest (CoI) problem.<br><br>What the SCI *CANNOT* do is change the substance of a GNSO Council decision and vote. Thus, even if the SCI considers the action taken by the Council illegitimate, the SCI cannot undo the vote. What happens then?<br><br>It seems to me that by NOT waiting on the SCI's recommendation, the Council has set up a potential situation of delicacy for both the SCI and itself, and should the SCI determine that proper process was not followed, a further problem as to explaining the mess to the Board, the GAC and the community.<br><br>I'd support an NCSG statement.<br><br>Cheers<br>Mary<br><br><br/><div style='clear: both;'>Mary W S Wong<br>Professor of Law<br>Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP<br>Chair, Graduate IP Programs<br>UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW<br>Two White Street<br>Concord, NH 03301<br>USA<br>Email: mary.wong@law.unh.edu<br>Phone: 1-603-513-5143<br>Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php<br>Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 <br></div><br/>>>> Avri Doria <avri@ACM.ORG> 12/20/12 6:46 PM >>><br>Seems an idea worth considering.<br><br>avri<br><br>On 20 Dec 2012, at 17:31, Robin Gross wrote:<br><br>> Perhaps NCSG should make an official public statement to express our concern regarding the mis-handling of this issue by the GNSO Council (and possibly staff due to their shepherding of the motion through regardless of proper process)? I think we need to draw attention to these problems where councilors are creating such privileges for their own clients with their council votes and also resubmitting a rejected motion without dealing with the conflict of interest causing the problem in the first place.<br>> <br>> Thanks,<br>> Robin<br>> <br>> On Dec 20, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Avri Doria wrote:<br>> <br>>> On 20 Dec 2012, at 14:22, joy wrote:<br>>> <br>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>>>> Hash: SHA1<br>>>> <br>>>> Thanks all for the comments. The matter was referred to the SCI today,<br>>>> following the Council meeting.<br>>>> Joy<br>>> <br>>> <br>>> It may have been referred to the SCI,<br>>> but that is a case too late.<br>>> <br>>> the motion that both staff and the chair wanted passed was rammed through.<br>>> in my opinion this was illegitimate.<br>>> and should have waited on the recommendation of the SCI.<br>>> <br>>> avri<br>>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> IP JUSTICE<br>> Robin Gross, Executive Director<br>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA<br>> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451<br>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin@ipjustice.org<br>> <br>> <br>> <br></body></html>