Questions for The Board-NCSG meeting
nickolas.adam at GMAIL.COM
Wed Jun 8 17:05:27 CEST 2011
On 07/06/2011 11:17 AM, Maria Farrell wrote:
> Thanks, Avri. I think an extremely pressing issue the Board can
> actually provide action rather than simply opinion on is question 3:
> 3. "While understanding that the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter is
> waiting on the approval of the standardized New Constituency process
> recommended by the Structural Improvements Committee, we would like to
> understand what issues, if any, may be blocking Board approval of both
> the New Constituency Process and the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter."
> I would really like to see this question put as a matter of priority.
> Many thanks, Maria
> On 7 June 2011 14:25, Brenden Kuerbis <bkuerbis at internetgovernance.org
> <mailto:bkuerbis at internetgovernance.org>> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:57 PM, <Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu
> <mailto:Mary.Wong at law.unh.edu>> wrote:
> Thanks, Avri. My vote would be for (1) the expanding role of
> GAC in ICANN and implications arising therefrom;
> I agree this would be a good topic of discussion. However, I would
> like the question to be a bit more provocative and open-ended.
> What I don't want to hear in reply is e.g., "the GAC's advice is
> an important part of our decision making, we take their advice
> seriously and balance it with other stakeholders and the policy
> making process, blah..."
> E.g., we could ask, "Is the current GAC model consistent with the
> ICANN bottom-up, multistakeholder policy making model? Can the
> Board see government representatives becoming more integrated in
> this model? If so, how?"
> My .02
> (2) the Board's view of how cross-community WGs could
> function; and (3) the likelihood of re-opening the bicameral
> GNSO Council setup, in view of the numerous deadlocks we've seen.
> Can you elaborate a bit on 3), Mary?
> *Mary W S Wong*
> /Professor of Law/
> /Chair, Graduate IP Programs/
> /Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP/
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
> Two White Street
> Concord, NH 03301
> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu <mailto:mary.wong at law.unh.edu>
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143 <tel:1-603-513-5143>
> Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research
> Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
> *From: * Avri Doria <avri at ACM.ORG <mailto:avri at ACM.ORG>>
> *To:* <NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
> <mailto:NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
> *Date: * 6/6/2011 10:14 PM
> *Subject: * Questions for The Board-NCSG meeting
> As was pointed out in the email sent regarding the Board-NCSG
> meeting in Singapore, and as mention on today's call, we need
> to propose 3 questions to the Board. The Board will also
> propose 3 questions to us.
> I will give people another day or so to suggest topics.
> On Wednesday evening, I will put together a doodle pool of the
> choices and over the course of Thursday, NCSG members will be
> invited to pick their top choices.
> On Friday, I will write up the 3 top topics, send it to this
> list for 24 hour review and then send it to the Board for
> their consideration over the weekend.
> To start the list we have the 3 topics we picked last time
> when the meeting was cancelled and two suggestions provided by
> 1. We would like to better understand how the Board weighs GAC
> advice in relation to GNSO recommendations, the CWG work and
> community comment on the implementation in the by-laws
> mandated process. Of special interest are issues related to
> MAPO/Rec6 and Community Objections.
> 2. We would be very interested to hear how the the Board
> reads both the substance and process of Cross-Community WGs
> and the JAS group in particular to understand what the Board
> is thinking viable supports might be and how they regard the
> recommendations for fee reductions.
> 3. While understanding that the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter
> is waiting on the approval of the standardized New
> Constituency process recommended by the Structural
> Improvements Committee, we would like to understand what
> issues, if any, may be blocking Board approval of both the New
> Constituency Process and the NCSG Stakeholder Group charter.
> 4. The role of the GAC within ICANN and how this might affect
> its stakeholder groups.
> (this may entail a re-write of #1)
> 5. Trademark issues.
> (might be good to have more detail on this question)
> Please send you suggestions for inclusion in the doodle poll.
> Updates on the questions from last time also requested.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ncuc-discuss