SPAM-LOW: GAC/Board meeting in Brussels

Mon Feb 7 00:44:43 CET 2011

All of which makes GNSO reluctance to pick up role on Consumer Trust, Confidence and Choice look very silly ...strategically!

R

Rosemary Sinclair

Managing Director, ATUG

Chairman, INTUG

T: +61 2 94958901  F: +61 2 94193889

M: +61 413734490 

Email: rosemary.sinclair at atug.org.au

Skype: rasinclair

Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information www.atug.com.au 

________________________________

From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Drake William
Sent: Monday, 7 February 2011 5:01 AM
To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: SPAM-LOW: GAC/Board meeting in Brussels

Hi

There's been previous mention on the list of the GAC-Board meeting in Brussels scheduled for 28 Feb-1 March.  Everyone's been sort of in the dark about the details, but today staff replied to the Council on a few aspects, see below.  The growing role of governments presents some interesting challenges for ICANN processes (one of the topics we'll discuss at the NCUC pre-conference event in San Francisco on March 11).  In addition to Kurt's answers below, the referenced update that was posted on Feb. 2 provides important info.   Re: live public attendance, ICANN's provided a full six days notice to RSVP from when the update was quietly posted, and "those whose RSVPs are confirmed will need to submit a copy of an airline ticket, hotel reservation or other indication of their intent to attend in person."  Moreover, "Please note that in addition to the open plenary sessions, smaller meetings focused on specific issues may also take place and may be closed to non-participants. If they occur, those in these smaller meetings will report on their work during the open plenary sessions."  So should anyone make a quick decision to attend, they'll need for their RSVP to be confirmed (hopefully automatic, but...) and then to quickly provide proof of intent, and they won't be allowed into the smaller break-outs where probably the real cards on the table discussions will take place.  Transparency and accountability under the AoC...Oh, and apparently the subject matter experts are just staff members...

Given the recent US government broadside on the Applicant Guidebook, particularly the censorship and IPR elements, and the unseen positionings of governments that haven't been so bold as to announce their objections yet, this should be a rather interesting meeting.  Hope some NCSG people can attend, even if there's no opportunity to speak...

Bill

Begin forwarded message:

From: David Olive <david.olive at icann.org>

Date: February 5, 2011 3:58:59 PM GMT

To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder at indom.com>, GNSO Council <council at gnso.icann.org>

Subject: [council] Re: GAC/Board meeting in Brussels

Dear Stephane and Council Members:

I consulted with Kurt Pritz on the questions raised by some Council
members on the GAC/Board meeting in Brussels.

Here are answers to those questions.

An update on the GAC/Board meeting

Kurt:  The Brussels session is a Board/GAC discussion, where Board and GAC
members will discuss differences, not a public consultation. The goal of
the Brussels meeting is to define clearly where the GAC and Board differ,
and not to change guidelines or procedures.   The GAC identified certain
areas of differences, but without concrete or specific details.  The
consultations are to explore further these topics, understand more of the
details from the GAC, and try to seek ways to narrow the differences.

Output:

A report about the discussions will be issued. If there are any changes
recommended that would differ from the GNSO decisions, they would be noted
in this report.

Public Participation:

Like at any Board/GAC sessions at ICANN public meetings, observers are
welcome to listen to the discussion.  Following GAC procedures, the
session will have streaming audio and transcription services
(no translations.)  There is a February 2 update on the ICANN website with
additional information, for those wishing to participate in person.
Please refer to: 
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-21jan11-en.htm

On others questions on how does the Board intend to draw the line between
re-opening the issues and closing remaining specific concerns and subject
matter experts.

Kurt:   That is a hard question, when to close debate on the new gTLD
program.  The Board said there will be a public comment period.
We will listen to those comments and if there is something novel or a new
approach suggested, we would propose an amendment
to the Guidebook.  We will take public comments up to the point when there
is a Board decision on new gTLDS.  Do you have any ideas on how to end the
discussion?

Kurt:
The subject matters experts are the ICANN staff members who have been
handling these topics/issues.
(The ICANN staff will present an introduction to the topics and the Board
and GAC members will
discuss them.)

Regards,      David

David A. Olive
Vice President, Policy Development Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
1101 New York Avenue, NW - Suite 930 - Washington, D.C.    20005
Office: 202.570.7126      Mobile:  202.341.3611

On 2/5/11 3:23 AM, "Stéphane Van Gelder" <stephane.vangelder at indom.com>
wrote:

David,

	Could you provide the Council with an update on this meeting and in

	particular, if the meeting is open to observers and what the meeting

	agenda is.

	Many of us have heard various things about the meeting and I think it

	would be good for the Council to have an "official version". It will help

	anyone wishing to attend this meeting to plan for that.

	Thanks.

	Stéphane

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland

william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
www.williamdrake.org

***********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20110207/ec08b9f8/attachment-0001.html>