GAC/Board meeting in Brussels

Mon Feb 7 13:05:28 CET 2011

It will be useful if Avri and Rudi are there - thank you to you both!

I suggest that NCSG consider putting together a short statement
commenting on the US Government's proposal, if possible. If we can do
this before the Brussels meeting and can circulate it broadly, it could
be helpful as an indication/feedback to Board and/or GAC members who are
concerned about non-commercial interests.

I won't be able to be in Brussels but hope to catch the Internet
stream. I also haven't had a chance to review the US Government proposal
as closely as I would have liked but will do so and try to help with the
statement if others think it's a good idea.

Thanks and cheers
Mary

Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH
03301USAEmail: mary.wong at law.unh.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage:
http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on
the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>> 

From: Drake William <william.drake at GRADUATEINSTITUTE.CH>
To:<NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date: 2/6/2011 12:09 PM
Subject: 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
***********************************************************

As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with
the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of
New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have
changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu.
For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law,
please visit law.unh.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20110207/6b62f20d/attachment-0001.html>