24 August Comment Deadline: Bylaw Amendments Related to Restructuring of the GNSO

Tue Aug 18 08:35:54 CEST 2009

As far as the nomcom's concerned the proposed 
bylaw amendments are not consistent with the new 
GNSO structure, they simply reflect the historic 
constituency structure and would obviously also 
be unfair to the noncommercial stakeholder group. 
Might be another factor in discouraging new 
actors from joining the NCSG as it's again seen 
as being disadvantaged compared to the other GNSO 
stakeholders.

How about proposing GNSO will provide six nomcom 
delegates, two from the contracted parties, and 
two each from the commercial and noncommercial 
SG.  One of non-commercial SG delegates being 
selected by the NCUC and the other by the board 
until transition is complete when the task passes 
to the NCSG (note, this is the status quo for 
NCUC and registries/registrars.) Number of GNSO 
delegates would be reduced to six.

Would be good to mention something about ensuring 
geographic and gender diversity across the GNSO's 
delegate selections (hard to implement...)

Travel expenses.

For the three council members the board's selecting now, the SOI document says:

"As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, such support 
shall not include an obligation for ICANN to fund 
travel expenses incurred by GNSO participants for 
travel to any meeting of the GNSO or for any 
other purpose. However, ICANN has furnished 
travel expenses for appointed Council members to 
ICANN meetings. Additional budget funds are also 
likely to be made available to support 
Constituency development."

Not sure if this is a more certain promise of 
travel support than used in the suggested bylaw 
amendments, but at least it would be good to 
demand that all council members be treated 
equally.

Adam

>Dear all,
>
>The 
><http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200908.html%23gnso-restructure>comment 
>period on the proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments 
>Related to GNSO Restructuring ends 24 August and 
>there are quite a few knocks to noncommercial 
>users in ICANN's proposal. So we need to draft 
>and submit some constituency comments on these 
>proposed bylaws amendments. For example, ICANN 
>proposes to give the commercial stakeholders 4 
>delegates to the Nominating Committee, while 
>giving the noncommercial users only 1 delegate 
>to the Nominating Committee. The Nominating 
>Committee is important because it selects key 
>appointments to ICANN, like the Board of 
>Directors, GNSO Councilors, and others. The bias 
>toward commercial views in the proposed bylaws 
>needs to pointed out in this comment period.
>
>If anyone would like to volunteer to create a 
>small drafting team to develop a constituency 
>position to submit on the proposed GNSO bylaws 
>amendments, please let me know. This must be 
>submitted one week from today, so time is short. 
>Thanks very much!
>
>More info:
><http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200908.html#gnso-restructure>http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200908.html#gnso-restructure
>
>Best,
>Robin
>
>------
>Bylaw Amendments Related to Restructuring of the GNSO Council (Version 2)
>Open:
>3 August 09
>Closed:
>24 August 09
>
>Explanation/Background:
>
>Implementation of the Generic Names Supporting 
>Organization (GNSO) Review/Improvements process 
>requires the amendment of a substantial number 
>of the ICANN Bylaws to reflect new GNSO 
>structures, processes and mechanisms. In 
>particular, a specific package of draft Bylaws 
>and additional Staff recommendations has been 
>developed for Public review and comment so that 
>the ICANN Board can move forward with Bylaw 
>amendments to seat the new GNSO Council by the 
>annual ICANN meeting in Seoul, Korea. Approving 
>the Bylaws amendments is a key step toward 
>seating a newly structured Council consistent 
>with the recommendations of the ICANN Board 
>Governance Committee.
>
>An initial set of Bylaws amendments (Version 1) 
>were posted for 
><http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200907.html#gnso-restructure>public 
>comment on 30 June 2009, reflecting the work 
>product of a GNSO Council Restructure Drafting 
>Team (consisting of the entire GNSO Council and 
>additional GNSO community members), and 
>additional Staff recommendations. The 
><http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-comparison-31jul09-en.pdf>Bylaw 
>Amendments (Version 2) [PDF, 256K] being posted 
>for public comment today are based upon the 30 
>June 2009 initial version and include additional 
>amendments that reflect guidance received by 
>Staff from the Board's Structural Improvements 
>Committee (SIC) as well as other issues 
>identified by Staff in its efforts to develop 
>Bylaws that are internally consistent and 
>conform to the principles of the BGC Report.
>
>The package consists of three documents.
>
>€ The first document is a side-by-side 
>comparison showing the existing Bylaws, revised 
>and redlined in the left column, and clean text 
>(Version 2) in the right column: 
><http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-comparison-31jul09-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-comparison-31jul09-en.pdf 
>[PDF, 256K]
>
>€ The second document identifies the key 
>differences between the draft Bylaws developed 
>by the GNSO through its Restructure Drafting 
>Team and this Version 2 text: 
><http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-notes-comments-03aug09-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-notes-comments-03aug09-en.pdf 
>[PDF, 76K]
>
>€ The third document is additional background 
>and explanation of Staff's rationale for certain 
>proposed amendments included in Version 2: 
><http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-explanation03aug09-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/general/proposed-gnso-council-bylaw-amendments-explanation03aug09-en.pdf 
>[PDF, 76K]
>
>Staff Responsible: Robert Hoggarth
>
>Deadline and How to Submit Comments:
>
>The Staff is opening a 21-day public 
>consultation forum, from 3 August 2009 through 
>24 August 2009, and invites community comments 
>on this topic.
>
>To submit comments: Comments on the document are 
>welcome via email at 
><mailto:gnso-council-draft2 at icann.org>gnso-council-draft2 at icann.org. 
>This public forum will be open through 23 August 
>2009.
>
>To view comments: An archive of all comments 
>received will be publicly posted at 
><http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-council-draft2/>http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-council-draft2/.
>
>For a copy of the public Announcement of this 
>forum please see 
><http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03aug09-en.htm>http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/en/announcements/announcement-03aug09-en.htm. 
>That Announcement provides inks to a number of 
>documents that give some useful context and 
>background regarding the issues in this forum.
>
>Is it clear to you what this comment period 
>covers? Do you have all the information you need 
>to respond? Please click "More information 
>please" below to email I
>Staff member responsible: Robert Hoggarth | 
><mailto:robert.hoggarth at icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20Bylaw%20Amendments%20Related%20to%20Restructuring%20of%20the%20GNSO%20Council%20(Version%202)%20public%20comment%20period>More 
>information please
>
><http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03aug09-en.htm>Announcement 
>| 
><http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-council-draft2/>Comments 
>| <mailto:gnso-council-draft2 at icann.org>Add a 
>comment | Summary/analysis of comments
>
>----------------------------------------------
>
>
>IP JUSTICE
>Robin Gross, Executive Director
>1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
>p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
>w: 
><http://www.ipjustice.org>http://www.ipjustice.org 
>e: 
><mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>robin at ipjustice.org