[NCSG-Discuss] A few points from today's NCSG Open Policy Meeting

[William Drake]

Hi

Thanks Robin, good notes, one addendum since you didn't have a access to the Adobe: there was a small bit of discussion about the one-page "cheat sheets" we agreed in LA to produce summarizing our positions on key issues for Fadi and his team, so they have some organized and accessible idea where we're coming from on a range of issues.  There was some back and forth about just how we would do this and then the discussion got side tracked, but I think the most popular view was that it should be done at the SG level and coordinated through the PC https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Issue+Summaries.   From my perspective anyway, one would think this should be antecedent to and more important than some of the other items mentioned yesterday.  Yes we could try to help others and broader processes by focusing the RAA discussion, supporting EWG, helping to define "public interest" for ICANN and all the rest, but shouldn't we first concentrate on getting out our own statements about our own views as a community, lay down some markers, make it less easy for ICANN leadership and staff to characterize community sentiments on a given issue in ways that ignore our views, etc.

We have three and half weeks until Beijing.  Shouldn't we be able to pull together teams to do concise and spiffy statements on say 6 topics, e.g. maybe a couple cross-cutting institutional (transparency, inclusion in the new extra-meeting meetings, outreach, policy/implementation) and a couple substantive policy (RAA, registrant right,s INGO, WHOIS, closed generics—both sides—etc).

If there's sufficient juice to do this, I'd volunteer to help with the institutional bits, as these synch better with the UC EC work underway...

Best,

Bill


On Mar 13, 2013, at 2:51 AM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> A few notes in advance of receiving the transcript and recording from today's NCSG Open Policy Meeting.
> 
> Proposal to organize a couple briefing sessions with ICANN staff and Registrar negotiators regarding the recent debacle over the Registrar Agreement Amendment (RAA) and ICANN unilateralism.
> 
> Proposal to organize a briefing session with privacy-concerned members of the WHOIS Expert Working Group about how NCSG can contribute to the EWG discussions and possible outcomes of EWG.
> 
> Proposal that NCSG help define "public interest" discussion at ICANN by preparing a list of criteria to consider in the evaluation (Wendy holds drafting pen - looking for input).
> 
> Below is the list of discussion topics suggested by NCSG members for NCSG GNSO Representatives to propose at Thursday's GNSO Council Meeting on the topic of Beijing planning.
> 
> GNSO & Board Discussion:
> 1.  Bottom-up multi-stakeholderism v. ICANN unilateralism
> 2.  Definition of "public interest" at ICANN
> 3.  ICANN engagement & outreach plans
> 4.  New constituencies
> 
> GNSO & GAC Discussion:
> 1.  Policy vs. Implementation - Roles of GAC & GNSO
> 2.  Definition of "public interest" at ICANN
> 
> CCnso & GNSO Discussion:
> 1.  Rights & Responsibilities document in relation to RAA
> 2.  ICANN engagement & outreach plans
> 3.  Regulation of CCtlds that look like Gtlds
> 
> I apologize if I've mischaracterized anyone's suggested topic above.  Please correct me.  And also if there are other suggestions to add to this list, please do.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> 
> 
> 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     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130313/e67e41d4/attachment-0001.html>