Greg Shatan, Holly Gregory, Jonathan Robinson, Lise Fuhr, Sharon Flanagan

Apologies:  Maarten Simon



  1. 1. CWG Dependencies (on CCWG proposal)
    1. Update on Sidley progress
    2. Discussion of any issues arising
  2. New ICANN Bylaws derived from the work of the CWG
    1. A plan to reduce size of initial draft bylaws
    2. Discussion of Sidley approach, progress and issues arising
  3. ICANN implementation of PTI (legal entity, articles, bylaws etc.)
    1. CWG oversight
    2. Any input from Sidley
  4. AOB

Notes & Action Items

1. CWG Dependencies (on CCWG proposal)

  • Sidley has the dependencies letter in the works and hopes to get it to CWG today. 
  • Notes the significant change in the 3rd draft (from Member model to Designator model). This change makes the powers 
    indirectly enforceable. Sidley's recommendation is that this is sufficient, but the CWG will also need to make that determination. 
  • Express to the CCWG that it's important to specially consider CWG comments, especially if the comment has been 
    made before (and not addressed).  
  • This is not simply a response to the Public Comment, it's a check on the requirements for the process. 
  • Concern about tone affecting working relationship with the Chairs (e.g. ambush feeling)

Action: Invite one person from Sidley team to the CWG call on Tuesday (at 16:00 UTC) to allow them to present. 

Action: Greg to send sentence to Sidley on the requirements of the CWG. 

2.  New ICANN Bylaws derived from the work of the CWG

  • Sidley presented the Bylaws. For the "notes to the CWG" staff compiled questions for the CWG to answer. CWG 
    suspended its work in anticipation of shorter, more simplified Bylaws.
  • Sidley suggests, that instead of simplifying Bylaws at the outset, work on the questions and then decide what needs 
    to be Bylaws and what can be 'policies' and included elsewhere. 

Action: CWG to make a first pass at the questions and then come back to the lawyers with a smaller, more focused, group to finalize. 

3. ICANN implementation of PTI (legal entity, articles, bylaws etc.)

  • ICANN implementation team has put forth a plan for the operationalization of the proposals. They are preparing, 
    while not implementing until signoff from the USG. 
  • Ok if ICANN holds the pen/ does first pass, but Sidley will need to review the PTI Bylaws at some stage. There 
    are some details that are not 'off the shelf' per se. 

Action: propose to ICANN that they approach the implementation of PTI in various stages. Seek agreement on 
principles before starting the drafting phase. 

4. AOB

Greg suggests that DT-IPR may need external legal work. 

Action Items

  • Action: Invite one person from Sidley team to the CWG call on Tuesday (at 16:00 UTC) to allow them to present. 
  • Action: Greg to send sentence to Sidley on the requirements of the CWG. 
  • Action: CWG to make a first pass at the questions and then come back to the lawyers with a smaller, more 
    focused, group to finalize. 
  • Action: propose to ICANN that they approach the implementation of PTI in various stages. Seek agreement 
    on principles before starting the drafting phase.



Documents Presented


Chat Transcript

  Brenda Brewer:Welcome to Client Committee Meeting #17 on 10 December 2015 at 17:00 UTC!

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Hi Brenda and Grace!

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):That 415 number is me.

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Hi Jonathan and Lise!

  Lise Fuhr:I have a problem  - can you dial out to me? +45xxxxxxx

  Brenda Brewer:yes, dialing Lise

  Lise Fuhr:Perfect thank you

  Lise Fuhr:Hi I am in now

  Lise Fuhr:On audio

  Lise Fuhr:Hi all

  Greg Shatan:Hello all!

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):Hi all

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):When is the Tuesday call? Thanks

  Grace Abuhamad:16:00 UTC

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):Perhaps CWG co-chairs shoudl deliver a copy to CCWG co-chairs

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Agreed Sharon

  Lise Fuhr:Agree but we need to be careful not to create panic

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Agreed Lise!

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Until the 3rd draft came out it was not possible to know if all issues had been addressed and that is what we are commenting on now.  Things may have been lost in translation between the 2nd draft -- and the discussions into the 3rd draft

  Grace Abuhamad:There is a formal liaison --> Avri Doria

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):Again, this is not a failure of anyone in my mind.  There was a short period to put together a 3rd draft.  Evenu we lawyers had difficulty following all the moving pieces and we had an opportunity to comment on a draft (although many of our comments were not addressed)

  Greg Shatan:Thanks Grace.  Perhaps we should reach out to Avri for her view as to whether the dependencies are met.

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):Agreed

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):on Holly's comment

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):That IRP group is too large in our view

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):I view this as more of a design team type project

  Greg Shatan:Hopefully Becky Burr will discipline the process on the IOT IRP.... :-)

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):the best thing about the IRp is Becky Burr! Thank goodness!!

  Greg Shatan:She is the lead for the IOT and she'll save us all.  :-)

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):Can notes be revised to reflect that Sidley will review PTI documents rather than may?  Thanks

  Greg Shatan:Agree 100% with this approach.

  Grace Abuhamad:Sorry for the delay

  Lise Fuhr:No

  Grace Abuhamad:We need estimates for the work

  Grace Abuhamad:Per the agreed process with ICANN FInance

  Sharon Flanagan (Sidley):We'll need to see the ICANN work product before we can provide a budget.

  Greg Shatan:Review should be at the very begiinning of the process.  And every step thereafter. And not just review but revision and comment.

  Holly J. Gregory (Sidley):We do not have an agreeement in our retention letter to provide budgets but have done so as a courtesy.  We have noted that it is inconsistent with the 15% discount that we provide and may need to revisit

  • No labels