Attendees: We have Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Evan Leibovitch, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Alan Greenberg, Carlton Samuels
Staff: Heidi Ulrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani Gisella Gruber.
1. Roll call and apologies – Staff (2 min)
2. Review of AIs from At-Large, ALAC and Executive Committee meetings during ICANN's 43rd Meeting - Olivier (40 min)
OCL*: *What I'm pushing for is for a session like that to deal with SOPA, ACTA, government control, et cetera. Any questions or suggestions? Okay so this is effectively ongoing. And I'll continue with this and there should be some news soon and of course I will bring that subject again to the SO and AC chairs.
OCL: Next the Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Working Group or the RRRWG is to consider the issue of the extent of dominance of US Registrars in regard to the internationalization of ICANN. I suggest just punting this over to the Working Group itself for it to work on it.
CLO: What we might want to do is to use the outreach possibilities that are available to us to encourage registrar business models to develop from themselves that might help to improve the number of registrars accredited from other than the United States. It seems to me that’s one way to do it.
AG: Thank you Olivier. I just wanted to point out to the ExCom although I'm sure you would’ve done this anyway Olivier that this is in fact a metric that is proposed for the consumer trust confidence and competition measurements.
TBJ: I am a little bit confused because we are still working on capacity building as something a part of the ICANN Academy and yet we said from the first that ICANN Academy is a framework of the whole learning activities in ICANN and also for us as ALAC, as the At-Large. I think that all the interest in the capacity building must be treated by the ICANN Academy Working Group.
CS: I think Tijani is right, we did agree on that. I mean that’s one of the reasons we thought that we should have Sala go with Sandra and the others who are leading the ICANN Academy. And work out a part of it.
CS: Thank you Chair, just to touch on something Rinalia mentioned online, there was a discussion if you recall when Glen McKnight came in and did the Moodle presentation because I know of a fact that was one of the issues whether or not we could have the ICANN Academy also oriented to the online world. Glen McKnight was there and Lance Hines from Guyana. He volunteered to help with hooking up the Moodle instance and so on. And I know he's talking to Sala about putting up an instance to
AG: I think we need to remember that if the Academy is going to become an ICANN wide issue, there is a separate capacity building issue of giving the At-Large twists to things. I know in my presentations that I've done in regional capacity building exercises in the last couple of meetings, I'm not giving a tutorial on in my case, the GNSO or policy or whatever the subject is, but how ALSs and how At-Large people should interact with this.And there's always I think going to be that aspect of it that we have to manage ourselves because that’s not something that’s going to come in the generic version that is being designed for a new GAC member as well as a new GNSO members as well as a new At- Large or ALAC member. That part of capacity building I think is always going to be ours no matter what happens in the Academy, thank you.
OCL: What I suggest then is to keep this firmly in the hands of both Sandra and Sala. And get them of course to work together.
HU: Yes I just wanted to let everyone know that on Monday after the meeting, I had the opportunity to have breakfast with Marilyn Cade and she took the opportunity to stress her concerns about the Academy and the need for wider capacity building activities within ICANN and within the ACs and SOs towards this project. And I did stress that the Academy was planning on having that in the future, that this was a pilot project.
CLO: I am however concerned that we don’t just get the same people in all of these work groups. That the regions do find a way to spread the load and remember that it doesn’t just have to be their executive or their Boards or whatever. That there are these ALSs that they all have and that it's okay for those reps to be involved as well.
Heidi Ullrich: And this is something I'm not sure if it's pertinent at this time, but it's something that Olivier and I discussed this past week and I had a chance to discuss more with Mandy Carver a few days ago is perhaps Cheryl right before you have your first call of the Outreach Working Group that there be a briefing call with the new VPs of the global partnerships.
CLO: I remembered the extensive comments that I put in on the particular topic in the internationalization and globalization survey. And I was hoping that others particularly at least in the ExCom might have been responding to the survey with similar verbosity. There is an opportunity to influence not this round of funding but future planning with appropriately worded responses. And they certainly got quite a few chapters from me.
OCL: As I understand the Board doesn’t meet with everyone during breakfast or lunches. So they have to choose depending on the sessions. It might be that in Prague we will get back to that. Cheryl and then Heidi.
AG: It's not a matter of that you're eating food at it, it's a matter at you have little round tables where you have personal engagement. And that’s what I'm hoping that we can do on a regular basis as opposed to okay it's our turn now, thanks.
AI: OCL is to follow up with Jean Jacques with what his suggestion was during the GAC meeting?
AI: EL to look through the notes of the meeting and determine what was said regarding human rights and the internet.
AI: Staff are to send ASO a list of countries where ALSes.
AG: Next time we invite people let's make sure that the name cards in front of them have the right names on them and have the right positions on them. At that meeting we had two Chairs of the ASO and that was a little bit, more than a little bit confusing to some people.
OCL: Heidi to work with Xavier to find a time for the call for the FDS in the ALAC in the next couple of weeks, that’s also a follow up. And then should Olivier approve the liaison reports webpage, staff are to setup a Wiki page template based on the ccNSO Liaison Reports web page for other liaisons.Work in progress.
The ALAC statement on the reservation of Olympic and Red Cross names in the new gTLD application procedure. That was also passed. As you all know the GNSO Council decided to vote to ratify the report which they have put together and I just wanted to check with staff. Our statement was also sent to the Board wasn’t it?Okay it might be good to remind the Board or perhaps I could send a copy of this over to the Chairman of the Board so as to remind them of the big reservations we have about this. And definitely noting that the vote itself, that took place was not a - so next statements currently being drafted or reviewed by the ALAC, and I'm glad to say that many of them are already on the way.
EL: I have not talked to Jean Jacque about this issue but I know he's passionate on the issue of conflict of interest. So in fact what I'm going to suggest here at the ExCom is to create a statement that gels together with what Carlton and Tijani and myself and others have done in the workspace, but something that conveys the urgency and importance of the matter while acknowledging that our work isn't finished and charging the Future Challenges Working Group which has already been working on this in the sense to come up with a more detailed document, and more detailed analysis, that comes out with specific recommendations. Thanks for your indulgence.
AG: I think it's important when we talk about these things to remember that this subject and not unlike WHOIS has the number of competing and diametrically opposed constraints in it and targets in it. We want to remove any perception of conflict of interest. On the other hand we don't want to remove so many people from the discussion that, you know, the whole board can't partake in it and those two are opposite things.
TBJ: First of all I think that the statement will be called to a proper as the time, a more detailed statement will follow and I think we have a project of a joint statement with the GAC and it can be this framework that the detailed statement can be done.The second point I think that the statement have matured and now we are saying that the contracted party or any other commissioned party are there and they are part of this multi-stakeholder model and they have to be there. But we said at the end that the selecting body has to be fair, have to be more or less impartial, that it doesn't have any interest to [inaudible 01:07:45] so that they can make the best [inaudible 01:07:49]. So I think that this is already [inaudible 01:07:53]. Please study so [inaudible 01:08:01] can finish it. I think it cannot [inaudible 01:08:06].
RAR: It's just a feeling and the feeling is that Rod does not have a lot of good will around him and the circumstances of him leaving leaves a rather bad taste. He raises an important issue. We've been concerned about this issue and we were doing something about it within the ALAC At-Large world and I think that we should say that we've been working on this and we can also refer to basically Rod's mentioning it as sort of like reinforcing the point that we shouldn't make Rod's statement as the main focusing event. Sorry, I never suggested that we would. I just said we can't have a statement that doesn't even mention it. I'm just saying he helped.call attention to it, but of course the issue is larger than Rod, the issue is larger than us and it started ahead of time. All I'm saying is that he helped bring it in to sharp focus. We do need to have something that is both immediate and a different document that is more thoughtful and analytical and long-term.
TBJ: I agree that we don't have emphasis on Rod statement. We can mention it as a trigger of the media noise, but we said in the statement if you read it that we had this concern much before the statement. So it is already in our statement and we have only to mention it as a trigger of the media noise. Thank you.
OCL:I have a question for all of you because the statement that is proposed is in response to a public comment period on an actual set of documents which have been provided for public comment. I don't note that our statement actually deals specifically with those documents, any thoughts about this?
TBJ: Absolutely.
CS: Who among us do not think that those documents were referred out because of Rod's statement?
CLO: No, Rod's irrelevant. On this it's irrelevant. A huge amount of work was already being done and continues to be done despite him.
CS: I do not disagree with that at all Cheryl. I'm just saying that if you look at the statement timing is everything on this and I am yet to see anybody convinced to make the case that what Rod Beckstrom did in this statement did not precipitate a movement forward on this. Remember our issue is for the public interest. It's not just about the statement for the documents. It's about what we're projecting for the public, that's how we're positioning this.
OCL:GAC has often been accused of circumventing the multi- stakeholder model.
IANNA Contract Negotiations
AG: You know we have to understand these are contract negotiations and we're not going to get everything in the sky put into this agreement just because we wanted there, but I think we need to look at it seriously and make sure there is nothing missing and there is nothing that we find exceedingly offensive that has been put in at this phase.
OCL: Thank you Alan. Tijani you had your hand up earlier but then you put it down now.
TBJ: Yes, I just want to say that I don't think that it can be one of the points that the New gTLD Working Group can work on. It is about the New gTLD and not about the contract. It's a registry contract and it doesn't have anything to do with the New gTLD Working Group.
OCL: Okay thank you Tijani. Could I then ask that Alan you follow-up on this but at the same time staff sends a request. It's not a request for a comment. I'm not quite sure how you call it, but a request to the ALAC for them to read or at least to those members that are interested in those things to read through and send any comments that they might have.
OCL: That request has already been made several days ago. Carlton did respond. Holly is likely to respond and I'm taking the lead on a number of things and I'm up to my ears. Holly has said she is willing to author something assuming other people work with her to decide what the content is. I'm happy with that. I'm surprised there is so little response though because these are the usual suspects. I do recall that some members of LACRALO in the past have put their hands up when there was contractual issues and have said they would be interested in pushing and going to this is well.
CS: Can I just say that I have had several conversations with Fatima on this. She's not sure of it and she told me that she would rather just have the one on one conversations with me on this. So she's asked for clarification. I balance it. I have other conversations with Alan on this too. You know there's only one problem and Alan couldn't help me and definitely we thought maybe we need some clarification and we prefer first to get that before we say anything. But I quite agree with the perspective by Alan.
ICANN Academy
OCL: The next steps are for a call of the Curriculum Committee to meet sometime next week to discuss what it will do. What I'm going to be pushing for is for representatives from all of the other SOs and ACs. And I'm actually looking at the wider SO as in not only the supporting organization leadership but also the different constituencies specific in the GNSO, for them all to be involved with the building of the course
OCL: You bet. Now whether the Academy is something we want to do this on or do it in a more ad hoc way is a different issue, but I agree there's nothing that would stop us from doing it if we're sure we want to except for the lack of interest from any other party which would stop us. The concern I have with regards to calling it a Cross Community Working Group is that this would involve creating charters and this would also have the possibility of delaying or stalling the process of the working group moving forward by having competing charters and people using the making up of a charter as a tool to slow the work down.
Tijani Ben Jemaa gave a review of the Finance Budget Requests.
OCL: Thank you very much Tijani for this. Is this going to be shared with the Finance and Budget Subcommittee?
TBJ: I want you to call for a meeting and I will send an email to give it to the members so that they come with the sheet with them and we can discuss it.
AI: A call for a meeting of the Finance and Budget Subcommittee to review the information that Tijani received it to be held.
OCL: Now a couple of things to bring forward, the first one is to just bring you up to date and I guess it is for the record as well on the LACRALO event that took place in Costa Rica. It was a resounding success, the Capacity Building sessions were all fully filled with people. The only thing that was a bit of a hiccup on was the GA with the rewriting of the bylaws. That took a lot more then originally expected.
CLO: I think we leave it to it's all in hand and we report back both at the next ALAC meeting and more importantly at the next Executive meeting.
OCL: Okay, thank you Cheryl and just one more thing on LACRALO. One thing that would be of great help, of course, would be to collect the feedback from all of the ALSs that came to Costa Rica. I think that Tijani you did that with the AFRALO ALSs and it would be great if you could help LACRALO with perhaps establishing a questionnaire. I've been sent a reminder of the report that you sent to the ALAC at the end, but it would be good to have maybe the list of questions that were asked and so on. Carlton you put your hand up.
CS: Yes Olivier. Just to comment on this there was a big kafuffle on the list afterwards because of private communication between Olivier and the ombudsman was inadvertently circulated. That caused a lot of noise on the list. A couple of things and I want say much about it here because I really do believe that we should take it out of here. But for one there might have been misrepresentation of my views and that's all I will wish to say here on that. So it was unfortunate the ombudsman inadvertently circulated it, but it actually exacerbated the situation, so just to make mention of that.
OCL: Okay, thank you Carlton. So then moving to the last thing I wanted to touch on and that was the statement of interest ALAC page which is a follow-up on an action item we had prior to Costa Rica. And that was a page we initially thought was going to be put up on thewww.ALAC.ICANN.org website, but do to current unavailability of staff to update that Matt and I decided that it would probably be a lot better and maybe better for us to control to have it on our wiki.Matt has put together a page to start. I don't know if you have the actual URL of this page that we can put in the chat, yeah the link. I know that some have not sent their information yet, so I urge anybody who hasn't and I haven't checked. So it might be that we here have all put our information up. Some have not, so if you could please send it over.
