ALAC Meeting
(Held June 22, 2008)
Legend
Name: First name of member of group
Name?: If we think we might know who's speaking but aren't 100% sure.
Male: Unsure of who's speaking, but know it's a male.
Female: Unsure of who's speaking, but know it's a female.
Name: 52 - 0.31.06 We will identify a foreign language in square brackets with a time code for the beginning and end, so that you can quickly identify those passages. At the top of the transcript, we will advise you of the name(s) of the foreign languages you'll need to search for. For example, some transcripts may contain German, so you'll have to search for "[German[ instead of |French" to find all the passages. The speaker identification is the same convention as all the others. i.e. If we know the speaker's name we'll include it, otherwise we'll put a question mark after it, or if we can't even guess, then Male, Female or SP.Translator. If translator actually translates French or German for a participant we will note it as "Translator". It will normally be evident from the dialogue who the translator is translating for. If not, we will include a note in square brackets with respect to who they are translating for.
********************************************************************************************************
List of Participants
Important Note: Please note that this should not be considered to be an "official" list of the attendees. This is just a list of the participants that we were able to identify during the transcription. There may have been others present that didn't speak and some people may have participated that were not on the official list of attendees published on the internet.
Asia Pacific: Cheryl Langdon-Orr (Chair); Izumi Aizu
ICANN: Nick Ashton-Hart
North America: Evan Leibovitch, Beau Brendler, Alan Greenberg, Wendy Seltzer, Robert Guerra, Darlene Thompson
Europe: Sebastien Bachollet, Annette Muehlberg
Latin America/Caribbean: Vanda Scartezini, Carlos Aquirre, Jacqueline Morris.
********************************************************************************************************
first 1.5 minutes background conversation prior to meeting
Cheryl: Okay, did you have a productive and useful small...
Male: Microphone, please.
Cheryl: All right, then. Well, welcome back to the table. I was delighted to see three very active working groups working on what I hope is going to be very interesting things to report on. Is there a reporter or a lead in each of your groups that wishes to speak to your outcomes, and if so, which group will I start with?
Female: 43 start.
Alan: Could you not start with the review one, because I’ve lost my power adaptor and I need to go find it.
Cheryl: Okay, okay. The review group will now be last, because Alan wishes to go and find a piece of missing equipment.
Male: I can lend you mine for a bit if you need it.
Cheryl: No, I think it’s the point that he needs it. Yeah.
Alan: 06
Cheryl: Just before... I think what we might do, we might go in the order of a small review... a small introduction from the summit working group, because many people who were in yesterday’s meeting are not here today, so we won’t be repeating ourselves. And many people who are here today weren’t in yesterday’s meeting. So just a synopsis from you. We’ll then move to morality and public order, and follow through to the summit working... the working group on summit review. Try again. ALAC review. Right.
Just before we go into that, there’s a small piece of housekeeping, and that has to do with tonight’s dinner. If Sebastien, if you’re ready, you’d like to bring us up to speed on that housekeeping matter? Thank you.
Sebastien: You prefer me to tell in English, to be sure that you...
Male: Yes.
Sebastien: Okay. Then tonight we organize a dinner for the ALAC members, liaison, secretariat and chairs of the different RALOs, and staff taking care of us. I have currently 18 people who say to me, “Yes.” I hope that all of them and all of you have confirmed and will confirm. But when I make this reservation to the restaurant where we are going, I asked for 25 dinners. Then I think it’s better to use those seats, and the proposal is to open to ALS’ representative to come with us, and I would like very much at the end of the session that you come to me and we discuss... you tell me that you want to come. I have then five... seven seats available. The cost of the dinner is € 30. No one penny more, everything will be taken care.
We will have to take cab or to go by Metro. It will depend on you. I will give you the address and the people... and we will meet... No, I will give you the address and we will meet at the restaurant, because as people have different hotels, it’s easier from your hotel. The goal is to be there at a quarter to eight – eight at the latest. And it will be organized to help us to discuss, to change tables... it will be a buffet, and we will be able to change tables.
It’s not far, but it’s not walking distance. It’s why you need either a cab or to take the Metro. I will go by Metro, and I will leave here around 7:50 from this hotel. If people want to join me, no problem. For the others, I will give you the address. I hope that I don’t forget something. If not, just ask me. You want the address inaudible 05.45? I will give it to you, no problem. Then the address it’s 911 Ave. But Franklin Roosevelt, I’m sure that you will not forget it. 911 Ave. Franklin Roosevelt in French. 911 Ave. Franklin Roosevelt in Spanish. Franklin Roosevelt.
Yeah, yeah, I tried to find a place... and sorry, but the name of the restaurant, it’s really... it’s...no, no, it’s made for... “Les Salons France-Amerique.” France-America Salon. And it’s... if you want to go by Metro, it’s Franklin Roosevelt station. Then it’s not very difficult. But if you come with me, we will walk a little bit and...
Male: Which Metro station?
Sebastien: Franklin Roosevelt. Franklin Roosevelt. It’s the same. But if you come with me, we will not go outside at this station, we will walk for one station and we will... It’s just near the Champs-Elysee. And then you will be able to walk at the Champs-Elysee after the dinner, if you wish. Or before, if you want. Thank you very much.
Cheryl: Sebastien, for those of us who write very poorly, and when they try and hand what I’ve written down to a taxi driver, it’s probably not going to be very successful, can I ask that you put the address on the Skype chat as well?
Izumi: I’m doing that.
Cheryl: Oh thank you very much. Thank you, Izumi. Okay, excellent, thank you very much. So, I think the value of finishing a long day like this in a spirit of camaraderie and sharing of good food and good company will be an excellent end to the day, so I do encourage you, if you haven’t put your name down, to do so. I think it would be 25 well-fed and relaxed people at the end of the evening.
I now hand to... I gather, Darlene, if you’ve got the computer you’re the scribe and you’re the reporter, for the 2008 ICANN summit.
Darlene: Thank you. We’ve got pretty much everything written down, so I think that’s pretty easy. We’ve already scribed it. This is not quite the format this is going to be in for the Powerpoint presentation. Nick sent me the format, or somebody did, and I haven’t got it yet. So this will be merged into a different format, but these are basically how the slides are going to go when we’re presenting this to the Board. So basically...
Cheryl: Sorry, just a slight point so we don’t get confused. This is being presented at the public workshop, not the Board. These are the other constituencies. So it’s selling it to the other constituencies. Sorry.
Darlene: Yeah. Sorry about that. So what is it we’re going to be... We’ll be talking on these slides, but these are the basic points. We will of course talking a lot of other things around it. So the basic point of this is to bring together representatives from At-Large around the world, run an ICANN summit as part of the ICANN general meeting, scheduled in Cairo. To start two days earlier than the general meeting, with other time allocated during the week. So, like, we’ll be starting on the Saturday, and the general meeting will be starting on the Monday. One person per ALS is to be subsidized to attend.
Why? All three of these points here were just cut and pasted right from our proposal, and then I tightened them up a little. So these are right from our proposal. Anybody who’s read it or anybody who wants to go on to the Wiki page can read all about this stuff. But this is basically the reasoning behind why we want to have the summit.
When? Day one, we’ll do an orientation, then information and training, history and culture of ICANN, and then perhaps some invited speakers. But these invited speakers aren’t going to be just saying, “Oh, welcome to the summit. Blah blah blah blah.” No. These are going to be speakers that are actually going to be giving informational speaking, you know. So this is... basically, it’s a whole day of giving people information.
Vanda: May I interrupt a little bit? Just fellowship has a very good process to teach people that’s coming. So perhaps we could share some ideas.
Darlene: Perhaps you could get that for us, Vanda, since you’re... That would be awesome. Yeah, thank you.
And then day two. As you all know, we just had a survey to go out to each and every ALS. And on those surveys, it asked what topics they might find of interest. So this... the workshops on day two will be based on the topics that people have indicated that they have interest in. But one thing, that these issues must be of global concern. They can’t be of regional concern, because we’re dealing with people across the world here. Or they can be emerging issues, but they have to be ones, of course, that are affecting ICANN. That’ll probably be the morning, and then in the afternoon we’ll have regional breakouts. So that people can talk on topics that are of interest to the regions. And then we’ll bring everybody back together to share the regional interests, so that everybody can get an idea of what is of interest to other regions that we’re not part of.
How? First of all, it was approved in principle by the Board in Delhi for this fiscal year 2008. A proposal has been submitted to the Board for a maximum subsidy of one person per ALS, and travel and meeting rooms need to be funded. As I say, this isn’t final at all. You know, we’re going to be adding and changing, but this is basically the points that we want to get across.
Then we’re going to do cost scenarios, which we didn’t get a chance to do in our little time there, so you can just pretend there’s a really pretty bar graph there, okay? So if 60 people attend, here’s how much it’s going to cost. If 80 people attend, here’s how much it’s going to cost. If we get all 100 ALSs, woo hoo! So, you know, just pretend it’s there.
Deliverables – Resolutions based on policy developments, working groups set up, timelines with clear planning guidelines. So these aren’t going to be things like, “Oh, well, we’d really like to do this, and we’d really like to do that.” No, no, no, no. Anything that we say we’re going to do, we’re going to have people allotted to head up working groups to deliver timelines, and to have actual deliverables, hard deliverables. Because that’s what any company that’s going to be spending half a million dollars is going to want to see. And real multi-stakeholder coordination. Because that is a major deliverable coming out of this.
Web links? Well, we’ve got one. We’ll have more. That’s it. Questions? Cool.
Cheryl: But I’m not going to let you get away quite that easily, as you might imagine. One of the things that I thought was exciting about this morning’s exercise with GNSO was how forthcoming so many of the council members were with local and regional outreach possibilities. Certainly, when you’re looking at... you’re seeing people giving real, hard information. Glenn from GNSO indicated that she felt it would be worthwhile us replicating, if not expanding, on what happened this morning in Cairo. And I said, “Ah, yes, but if we get the support that we hope we will for the summit, we won’t be having the type of meeting we’re having. We’re having a summit in Cairo.” And she said, “Well, surely it could perhaps even happen in a larger scale.”
So I think those sorts of offerings and outreaches are going to meet a number of our core objectives, and I’d be very excited to further that with the content group later.
Darlene: And another thing, actually, we forgot to put on there, is although the summit is happening two days in advance of the general meeting, the summit... people are going to be there for the entire meeting. Two days before, then the entire general meeting, so that they can then attend other workshops and break-out stuff and such like that, and enhance the learning experience that way.
Cheryl: So there’ll be real participants in the normal ICANN meeting. One of the things that you may not have thought about is that, of course, the wrap-up, on what needs to be a later day, we would probably need to sacrifice our normal ALAC meeting to do that, but I think for something as important as a real General Assembly Plenary session, that would be done. I see Carlos. Is there anyone else who... Robert and Jacqueline. Okay.
Carlos: Spanish 15.04
Translator: Just a question for you. You said 60 people, but there are more than 100 ALSs.
Cheryl: The Spanish translation, because she was just wrapping up things technically, so I’m happy to field that, if you like. It’s one of the scenario models. Because we wanted to say that we are not so naive to believe that everyone would turn up, and we knew we would be challenged on the amount of money, we wanted to give a very visual and clear... This is 60 people turning up, this is 80 people turning up, this is 100 people turning up. Go ahead.
Robert: I just want to make a comment. I think I’ve kind of made it in the past. I’ll change it a little bit in regards to the summit. I’m supportive as to wherever it might be done. I think two things that need to be done when a venue is finally selected... so if the Board says, “Okay, now to do it in Cairo.” I think that then we need to think of the venue, and the country or the region. If we have a summit in a region and the Internet users from the region or the country are not there, for me would be... You know, it would be problematic in the way it’s seen. And so we need to be proactive, maybe working together with staff and others, to make sure that we can engage the community wherever the summit is held. As I’ve mentioned online, you know, I’d be willing to help with that.
The other thing, too, is given the... so that’s kind of one point. The second point is, given what seems to be real honest and interest from the GNSO this morning, and maybe sharing or pooling resources, I think we should try and follow up on that. And, you know, I think if it proves to be the case that collaboration is possible, I think it would really show that ALAC is able to help, you know, increase participation in ICANN as a whole, not only ALAC per se. Some people at ICANN see that we just kind of serve our own interest, and I think we should try to figure out, by the end of the week, what are ways that we can work with GNSO staff and others, so when there’s outreach that we can do, it actually helps the broader community as well. Seeing as they expressed interest in doing that. So, I’ll just... as an item to put on the agenda.
Cheryl: Okay, to the second point first. The on-going dialogue with GNSO is going to happen, but what’s really important with the individual connections from the constituency members from the GNSO, so I suspect what we’ll be doing is working longer for a GNSO relationship, but working faster for relationships at regional levels with the constituencies that make up GNSO. And yes, we need to further that.
To the first matter, of course, yes, we have in fact discussed this, as you know, and you also know I’m now going to throw to Evan to respond publicly on the purpose of a general assembly for ALSs versus an outreach exercise.
Evan: The two don’t preclude each other. The primary purpose of the summit is to bring together the ALSs, the existing structures that are there. Unfortunately, the people that have individual status within various RALOs, such as the people on the Board of EURALO, or the individual members of NARALO, are not going to be subsidized, is my understanding, based on the criteria that we put forward. It’s our interest in having observers. They’re open meetings. If we have observers from the local community, from other constituencies, they’ll all be welcomed. But the primary purpose of the summit is to serve the ALSs that have already taken the interest in participating so far. That may sound casual in saying that being in Cairo is almost a coincidence, but we weren’t sure where the summit was going to happen when we first proposed it. And so obviously it would be our intention to try and bring in the local community wherever we would have it, but at the end of the day, the primary purpose of this is to serve the At-Large structure as it exists.
Cheryl: Jacqueline.
Jacqueline: Okay, um, one quick thing is that there are some typos, but I’ll talk to Darlene about that after.
Female: 03
Jacqueline: But more importantly, with regard to getting a lot more ICANN... the entire ICANN community to participate in something like this, because At-Large is really important for the entire ICANN, we could possibly get, based on like the GNSO and the ccNSO and what they’ve been talking about with regard to how we interact and how we can work together. Some of the speakers that we were talking about on the first day could be technical specialists from the other organizations, the 41, the GNSO, etc., etc. So we can get them involved, and get their buy in and their support. If we get them in, you know, kind of early, and it’s not just, “Oh, At-Large is going off on their side and doing this apart from the rest of ICANN.”
Cheryl: Absolutely. The integration exercise is a big part of this. This is certainly an orientation, an in-service, and in fact it’s getting everybody at the same foundation level, but it’s very much a marketing for what we can be as well as what we intend... that we already are. So yeah, it needs to bring the other SOs and ACs in at as high a level as possible, and the sub-committee has already gone so far as to suggest that moderators and the “staffing” of the events should be drawn from the other constituencies as well. Just maximize the integration.
I’ve had a request that we move now to the next presentation, but I’m going to switch the order of the next presentation, because Alan does want to be here, and he has another commitment. So if I can ask the... who’s reporting for the working group on the ALAC review?
Female: 54
Cheryl: Okay, Annette, and please, we do need to speed it up a little bit. Thank you.
Annette: No problem to speed up, because in our meeting we have three points we want to share with you. The first is, that we think that the timing for the review has not been very lucky, because we think that it would have been more helpful if the new ALAC, in its new structure, in its current new structure, would have been under review, which would take a while. So that’s the first thing.
The second thing is that we decided that we cannot give any recommendation to the group here for a statement on the review, because the review, to really work on it, takes much more time than we had in this afternoon. So of course we came up with many thoughts and ideas and interpretations and statements on it, but we decided the best is that we come up with a proposal to you.
That’s the third thing, and the final. Our recommendation is that each RALO should review the review, and prepare a statement and looking at the negative, what they don’t like, looking at the positive, what they do like, and point those parts out. And that we think it is a smart idea to go through this recommendations part and make a statement on each recommendation, if they think these are good ideas or bad ideas, and to have a look at the general part, because we think that yes, the whole general part about history and I don’t know what, that this is also a political message we also should have a look at and make a statement on it.
So, in a whole, we said that... we think it would be smart to build on those parts we think are positive, and to build on those recommendations. That’s the summary of our working group.
Did I miss anything?
Male: 05
Annette: Thank you.
Cheryl: Thank you. And I must say what we need to remember is that we don’t have a final yet to work on, that won’t happen until the Board will accept or otherwise the mod-... the draft we have now is still subject to modification, before it goes to the Board. That’s the purpose of the public workshops. So there will be another version before that work has to start, so let’s see what is going to come in, okay? Yes? Go ahead.
Alan: On the other hand, that’s a reason to do our work, our first pass, moderately quickly, so we can impact the final version.
Cheryl: Yes, if that’s the purpose, that’s fine, but that wasn’t what I heard from that presentation. So sorry if that was my misinterpretation. Go ahead Evan.
Evan: Annette, hopefully in making your life a little easier, as soon as we received notice that the draft was out on Monday, NARALO set forth to actually review it, actively have its ALSs participate. I’m sorry I couldn’t be involved in your meeting, or else I would have entered in a draft position that we have already taken, and I’m just waiting to get the absolute consensus from everybody. It’s actually on its second draft. I can either read it or I can give it to you, as you wish.
Annette: I very much wish so, but I think that every one of us is interested.
Evan: So, should I read it?
Cheryl: Well, more to the point, I think we need to find a home for all of this work on the Wiki, because it needs to reach out to all of the ALSs, and I think those of us who aren’t here are going to be as interested as those who are. Yes, go ahead.
Annette: Although one of the recommendations is use the Wiki instead of e-mail, I would say Evan, please send it out as an e-mail too.
Cheryl: As well as.
Annette: Yes, as well as.
Alan: Annette volunteered to be the rapporteur from this group. I don’t think she volunteered yet to be the consolidator of all the reviews of the review.
Annette: Thank you, Alan, for this clarification.
Cheryl: Evan, is it a particularly long statement? Do you wish to have it read into the record?
Evan: At this point, since it’s a second draft that hasn’t received universal consensus, I won’t do it at this point. But I just want to let... I’ll send it to you, and just let you know that this is... The first draft was sent out and received wide acceptance, a couple of edits, and the second draft reflects those edits. So far the comments I’ve received have all been positive, and I expect it to achieve consensus.
Cheryl: And I think that we just need to remind everybody as they’re doing their outreach that the full documents, not just the summary, but the full documents and the summary are part of our Paris documents, because I gather from I think it was yesterday, or earlier this morning, that somebody was saying that links on other places in the ICANN to the documents weren’t functioning. Well, it’s in our Wiki Paris documents, so there’s no reason to delay the outreach to the ALSs.
Do I have anybody else who wishes to speak on this matter? Yes, Alan.
Alan: I don’t wish to speak on this matter, but if we’re finished and I have to leave, if anyone sees a little purple springy thing like this around, it’s a power adaptor. I’ve lost one. I think I know where it might be, and I’m going to go look now very quickly, but if you happen to notice one of these around, keep it for me. This one is Izumi’s.
Cheryl: Okay, thank you very much. I’ll now call on the third group, and I’m wondering who is going to be doing the reporting from the morality and public order?
Jacqueline: Okay, I’m just going to read what Carleton handed me to read. And it says, “Resolved – Any ICANN process in which morality and public order, however defined, is an evaluation criterion, debases the ICANN process. For any international organization, the notion of public order is out of order, since the concept is so bound to the idea of the nation-state. An international organization cannot be principled on the one particular notion of morality. We also question whether ICANN is an international organization or US corporation. Human rights instruments should not be linked to notions of morality. Human rights are intrinsic, whereas there are no intrinsic rights to domain name purity. Local community standards may not be determined or adjudicated by any international tribunal. Well-established local systems are already in place to adjudicate questions of morality and public order. Domain names ought to be treated as symbols devoid of meaning, and they are not intrinsically a trademark. The ICANN process favours dispute resolution companies at the expense of users. ICANN risks straying into areas that are clearly treaty obligations, and we are also to refer to articles 19, 27 and 29 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Cheryl: Well, all I can say is, “Well done, thank you, and an amazing piece of wordsmithing in such a short time. Excellent.” I’ll open that for comments, and I doubt many criticisms. Go ahead, Robert.
Robert: Kudos, great thing. I think in terms of... kind of two quick questions. One, can I get a copy of that electronically?
Female: All of us, please.
Robert: Number two is just, where is that going to be presented, because I’m interested in sharing that, or at least figuring out if we might have support with some others as well. I’m particularly thinking to see if Sierra or the Canadian government might be interested, but just in an electronic form, which I’ll just say there’s a statement, and just to see if there’s support, and just like to know where it is going to be presented. Thank you.
Cheryl: I can take the answers on that. Of course, what we do today becomes part of the record for today, but we have a new gTLD subcommittee... sorry, working group, and this hopefully has resuscitated.
Robert: Sorry, my specific question is, do we have a particular day and time when that document is going to be read?
Cheryl: I would suggest that we have our lead, if you look across the table to Beau from that working group, and I’d like to see it as soon as it can be put up. I see Annette. Go ahead.
Annette: I think it would be very nice if that would be an official statement of the ALAC and the RALOs right here. Of this working group. So that it’s not just a paper of this working group, of this meeting here, but of all of us. So that we could just, you know, say this is one output. So I think that’s perfect, so we could just all... if there are no objections, I would say that it’s an official statement.
Cheryl: I’m not sure that we can have the official statement status in terms of it not having at least the opportunity to go home... not go home, I don’t mean home to your homes at all. I mean to sit and say, “Now, would my ALS have a problem with the word ‘trademark’? Does that one word need to come out?” There’s a little... it’s very easy to get excited by brilliant words. But I’d like to have it become a statement that is properly thought through and has longevity. That’s why I’m suggesting the working group, who is charged with this activity, needs to continue to dot the “i”s and cross the “t”s on it while we’re here, and then we can have it perhaps as a motion from that working group to become a statement. But I’m asking the people whose job it is to be doing it to respond. Go ahead Robert.
Robert: I’m of the personal opinion that I think there’s strategic value in having that statement read at the corresponding time during the ICANN meeting proper. It is a powerful statement, and everyone will quickly know at the meeting. If it comes after the meeting, we will have missed the strategic value of the document. And so I think there’s... you know, yes, we should consult, but we should do that in the next couple of, you know, within this last day, or before the end of the meeting. Then maybe the last public forum before ICANN closes, but it should be read during this week, because otherwise, you know, we’re going to miss a strategic opportunity. That’s my view.
Cheryl: I’m just looking, or getting Nick to look, so we find out exactly when it is... would you care to enlighten me since I can’t see on the thing exactly when this is being discussed.
Nick: Well, the reports of supporting organizations 58 mic turned off Thursday afternoon.
Cheryl: So we’re looking at... is it the Thursday afternoon, organization and advisory committees to the Board? No, that’s our report. I understand that. Which bit of the ICANN meeting are you wanting it?
Robert: I’m just saying that, I mean, if... my personal preference is the sooner the better, but if we want some time to get this, then, since we are an official advisory committee of the Board, and the Board meets on the last day, then we could make our statement on the last day, and the meeting of the ICANN Board is 4 to 6 p.m. on the Thursday, so I would say on Thursday we should present it, and we would be giving, you know, giving it to the Board.
Alternatively, because it’s a GNSO, you might want to present it to the GNSO. There’s a... in terms of looking at the GNSO when their last meeting is...
Cheryl: Yeah, I mean, we have our meeting on Tuesday. I was hoping that this would... 06
Robert: There’s an open GNSO council meeting Wednesday 8 to 12.
Nick: Just on a point of clarification, of course you could read it out in the GNSO meeting, but the GNSO will turn to you and say, “This policy left us and went to the Board where it now sits.” So, I mean, it’s not that no one will hear it, just that is actually for the Board to approve or not at the present time.
Robert: 4 p.m., Thursday June 26th is the meeting of the ICANN Board, so that would be, if we need more time...
Cheryl: I can’t imagine that we’d need more time. I was asking which session you were proposing it be entered into. The Board meeting is the answer from you. Is that the feeling of the group, because it is your group that is saying this. This whole table, you’re all... yes, go ahead Evan.
Evan: I see no reason why not to have it at both. To bring it at the Board, and also to bring it at the public forum, in front of other constituencies. Why is it an either/or?
Cheryl: I was looking for a workshop on new gTLDs because that’s where it best belongs, right? Remembering that if you go back to, if you go back to the timeline... yes, Wendy, I see you. If you go back to the timeline, there’s a process and then public comments. And that’s going to be, as far as I’m concerned, in parentheses right at the top of our cover page. But there’s a number of places where we probably need to inject this either specific or type of statement. I want you to clarify to me where and when we’re putting it in. At the moment, I’ve got the Board meeting at Thursday as the option on the table. Are there other options, or is there agreement on that?
Evan: My suggestion was both there and to have something also at the public forum.
Nick: Monday. Monday is the main gTLD workshop.
Cheryl: Okay, Monday is the mail gTLD workshop. So we really need to decide. That would be more appropriate, if you don’t mind me suggesting that... it’s the gTLD workshop is focussing on public comments for this document, and I think it needs to be perhaps injected there. Do you agree that that is another opportunity to inject this kind of statement. Yes, go ahead Annette, and I still have Wendy.
Annette: Well, first of all, I would just say again, if we all take this as a statement, it’s not just this working group but this whole group here. That’s already stronger. Second, make it spread the message. Use every meeting you have, and just say, “That’s what we think.” And you have the public forum, you have the GNSO and things that you just mentioned, and the Board. Sounds great to me.
Cheryl: Wendy.
Wendy: Just a thought. Thanks for engaging in that discussion. And where this is right now is at the Board, on a super-majority vote of the council, and being presented for possible approval, even possibly at the end of this meeting. And so the by-laws tell us that when the council reaches a super-majority vote, the Board shall adopt the policy, unless, by a vote of more than 66% of the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN.
So At-Large is an important part of the ICANN community, and if At-Large declares that the new gTLD policy, as approved by the council, is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN, that would be an important argument to be making to the Board, ideally before their Thursday meeting, so that they can be considering that in the vote, and in... either in postponing the vote or in voting against it, if that is what you would like to urge them to do.
Cheryl: Go ahead, Annette.
Annette: Practically, I would just say, could you add that, discuss that with the working group, so that it has the right introduction to it, so that we have the right wording to begin with. I think that would be helpful.
Cheryl: You’re referring to Wendy then, I take it.
Wendy: You’re asking me 54.
Annette: Jacqueline just gave the presentation, and you could just give, you know, so you have the right wording about the community thing there.
Cheryl: Carlos, I do apologize for missing you.
Carlos: It’s difficult. Okay, 14
Translator: Just a request. No, not really a request, actually. I just want to say that I pay tribute to the Latin America/Caribbean group and Africa for this work.
Cheryl: Thank you. I think we all do that. The first opportunity to read this into the public record will be at the new gTLD workshop. It would be an ideal opportunity, particularly if we can get the preamble work together. Is the new gTLD working group willing and able to get the final draft with its preamble ready to read, and then might I ask... I would suggest that it should be the ALAC lead on that working group that reads that, but it’s up to you to decide who does it. Because I’d like to see them noticing working group resulting in action, and saying, “As a result of this working group’s action, the ALAC meeting and the assembled RALO members on Sunday were able to agree to the following,” okay? Because it gives it a good amount of weight.
I see Evan, and who else? Was that you, Carleton? No, just stretching – okay.
Evan: I would take it a step further and actually, at that meeting, at the workshop, I would make it clear that this is being submitted to the Board as well. I’d like the people that were involved in the drafting to be aware that there is At-Large opposition to what achieved a super majority. I mean, if it’s a workshop and not simply a presentation. I think there’s more that can be said there than simply the summary document that will go to the Board.
Cheryl: I believe that they’re painfully aware, apart from... and they’ve just chosen not to listen, apart from the fact that the comments that went in from various ALSs... certainly my own ALS put in an objection on rule 6, AP-RALO put objections in on rule 6, any number of our constituent bodies put in objections. The exercise today was very clear where our hearts and passions were lying. There’ll be no, “Oh, what a surprise!” right? What we need to do is engineer it properly into both the public record in that workshop, so that it fits into... And can we get that... 55 I’m sorry?
Nick?: Andreas is also looking to speak.
Cheryl: I didn’t hear or understand a word you said.
Nick?: Andreas is looking to speak to you.
Cheryl: Andreas can speak now, then. Thank you.
Andreas: off mic – inaudible
Cheryl: You don’t wish to speak. You do wish to speak. Please, speak.
Andreas: I’m not used to the ICANN mechanisms, and I don’t understand a part of our proposal here. Are we refusing the whole policy, or are we proposing a concrete amendment to a part of it?
Cheryl: It’s actually not opposing a whole policy. It’s reaffirming our continuing concern and objection of a particular rule which is part of a much larger document. Did I capture that properly, working group?
Several: Yes.
Cheryl: Okay. I’d just ask Nick to bring up the last slide from Olaf’s presentation, which...
Nick: 57
Cheryl: ... will be here soon. Because what we need to do now, while we’re excited and enthused, is work out where else in this time course this needs to be implemented... needs to be put in. It will become part of the official statement, which is what’s in the Board meeting. It will make its statement at the working group, but we need to look there to see what other opportunities we have.
Can everybody read that, because I can’t, I’m afraid. I’m blurry from here. So perhaps, Nick, can you follow through on what that actually says.
Nick: You’re asking for the Other Comments spots?
Cheryl: Yeah, the Other Comments spots.
Vanda: Final meeting. Then the next one would be Mexico, I guess.
Cheryl: No, no, no. We need to... it’s not places. Okay.
Male: 57
Nick: Well, okay. Well, if you presume that, as Wendy has said, the policy is near to the point where the Board will adopt it, or otherwise... At the point where it is adopted, then the starting gun is basically fired, and the draft RFP would then be issued in... sort of part way through the last quarter of the year, during... it looks like during the Cairo meeting, almost. Comments would then be taken. There’s a three to four month period between the draft RFP and the final RFP being released, so there’s expected to be a rather extended public comment period. And then the... between the final RFP and the launch of the application round is at least four months.
Now, the thing to remember here is that the overarching policy, once adopted, will have been adopted. So any points like this that you care to make of a substantive nature to the policy would need to be made before it is adopted. After it is adopted, there is then of course an enormous amount of detail, and you can make very substantial contributions, it must be said, to the way in which the program runs, but, for example, whether or not an objection is possible on these grounds is... that’s related to the policy itself.
So the Board would have to say... you couldn’t really affect that in the development of the RFP. If that objection is allowed, that objection is allowed. If you understand the difference between the two... the two things.
For what it’s worth, I would say that... make as strong a statement as you wish. I would also make sure that you say that you will have more to say on the rest of the policy, because there are obviously other areas. This is one part, but only one part.
Cheryl: Okay, any other questions or comments before we tidy up the fact that... who’s going to do what on this? Because obviously we need the information Wendy brought to the table to be put in as part of the overriding statement.
Jacqueline, Carlos, Beau – who is leading this, who’s working with getting this done, and who’s reading this out in the new gTLD workshop? I’ll make sure it gets enshrined into our report from our committee, but I need to make sure that it goes in early as well, so that it starts influencing. Go ahead, Beau. Thank you.
Beau: I would like to make sure that the rest of the working group actually reads it. That needs to happen before it goes into any of this other format, so I will volunteer certainly to send it out...
Female: 12
Beau: What? I have it in my e-mail, yeah. I’ve got it on my screen. So it needs to be read by everybody in the working group.
Cheryl: I think that goes back to my slightly cautious words earlier on, which is getting... we all agree with the sentiment and the enthusiasm, but we also have to make sure that we are reaching out to the people that are involved in all this. So Beau, if you are taking the lead on that, and Wendy is providing the information, obviously we need to make sure that Wendy has everything that you as a working group, with our endorsement, are producing. Because she’s our interface into the Board.
So the time course on the meeting on Monday is the afternoon, I believe. We need to have sign off on this. We can basically give you an in-principle sign off, unless you suddenly change things enormously, here and now, I would suggest. Is that the case? Is everyone comfortable with an in-principle sign off here and now, but subject to some wordsmithing and wider peer review? I’m looking at nodding heads.
Okay – what does that say?
Nick: Well, the workshop is Monday, tomorrow, from 4:00 to 6:30. So, Beau, if you need any help trying to directly reach the members of the working group, we can certainly send it out to them on their individual e-mail. I happen to have, actually, the phone numbers of at least half of them, I think, because they were former ALAC members. So...
Cheryl: Yeah, I think that amount of energy would be well worthwhile on this matter. So that probably means that by the end of lunch tomorrow, we should be able to look at a final statement that we as an ALAC and the assembled RALOs at this meeting are endorsing for the working group to have read into the public record. Do I have your agreement on that?
Several: Yes.
Cheryl: Is there anyone who wishes to dissent from that? Is there anyone who wishes to have their vote not recorded? That looks suspiciously like unanimous results to me, and I think a job well done. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. I note the time. I’d like to ask any of you who wish to have a final word to wave your hands frantically at me now.
Vanda: I need to go.
Cheryl: Yes, thank you Vanda. 49 Go welcome fellowship people. Yes, I see Izumi and I see Jacqueline. Go ahead.
Izumi: Unlike the previous workshops, mostly focussing on the team building, this one is focussing on the policy discussion, I understand. Although I think we haven’t prepared the questionnaire feedback on this, have we? No. It might be helpful if you could just casually perhaps give more feedback on the way we handle this meeting, especially for those relatively newcomers, because I am an incumbent. That would be helpful to improve any areas to the next round of this kind of meetings. Thank you.
Cheryl: Thank you. Jacqueline.
Jacqueline: Mine is a practical matter. It being 7:00, how are we really getting to this restaurant for quarter to eight, after going back to the hotel and dropping us. Can we... is it possible to shift it 41
Sebastien: Don’t worry, we are in Paris, you will have plenty of time to arrive to the restaurant and have your dinner. Just relax. You will be on time, whatever the time you arrive.
Jacqueline: Okay, thank you.
Cheryl: Just before we then finalize, Izumi has picked up on one of the rounding off points. The change in format for this one day workshop was clearly going to be focussed on policy because of the briefings we had. What we did not really plan for, because we weren’t even aware we’d be able to get the consultants from Westlake in, is that we would have to shift so many things in our agenda.
I thank you, as one of the organizers of today, for your indulgence to allow us, I think, to have full and frank discussion on important matters. The team building and the small group exercises which we normally do at these events will not be lost, will be revisited, and in fact, as we get new members into the ALAC, it’s another time when we need to go back and revisit some of the team building. But we certainly needed to make today’s effort a somewhat exceptional one focussed on getting our briefings done, on the unbelievably large amount of information and materials we’re supposed to comment on around this time.
Thank you all. I look forward to dining with you and relaxing with you later. I’ll certainly be going by cab, and I was wondering, Sebastien, if I might ask what time those of us who are getting cabs should assemble and try and get them.
Sebastien: I suggest that we get half an hour from now, then at half past seven, for the people who want to leave from here. And we will be arriving around eight o’clock and it will be great. If you are late, don’t worry, you will have still something to eat. The people who are not on my list, please come to me and we will see if we can accommodate you, and about the money, you will have to give it to me when you are able to do it. It’s not in a hurry either. Thank you very much.
Cheryl: 30 Euros, and Izumi waved at me. What do you wish to say as a final gesture?
Izumi: Thank you Sebastien, is the word I’d like to share with you guys, because you’re not only the ALAC members, but you are the very key organizer of the whole event. So I understand, I am sitting here for the full day, and also leading the other team is a kind of a challenge, but you did a great job, so I’d like to just acknowledge with all others. 22
Cheryl: And I’m sure you won’t be surprised if you hear similar words later tonight. Okay, then, look forward to that, getting together this evening. If you haven’t given Sebastien your name, please do so now. There are seven seats available. 30 Euros, well worthwhile.
Tomorrow morning, I need to mention, we start at 8:30 in the main hall. It is not as advertised. The agenda, the main agenda, has moved forward – it is an 8:30 start. The president’s report begins at 8:30 tomorrow morning. It is not as advertised.
Nick: And then the Minister.
Cheryl: Then is followed by the opening with the Minister. So please, we’ll see you all slightly before 8:30 in the main hall, which is 18
Sebastien: French word. The main room when you are in the foyer, it’s the last room on your left. And even if you don’t come for the Minister, please, please come for me.
40, followed by 4 minutes of ambient sound
end of audio
