Strongly suggest the constituency proposes at
least two people, Konstantinos and also Mary if
she has time.
It's a board resolution, once started they aren't
easy things to reinterpret whatever one (one of
15) might think.
Note the GAC's very strong endorsement of the
resolution. And Jennings' comments.
Get people on this group.
Adam
>Complexity is still ICANN¹s trademark. I agree
>with Milton if that is the case the only thing
>we can do really is sit back and wait. I am
>happy to proceed either way and give my input on
>behalf of our group at any time.
>
>Thank you both Milton and Bill.
>
>Konstantinos
>
>
>On 12/03/2009 11:56, "William Drake"
><<>[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>On Mar 12, 2009, at 11:47 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>Just had a private email with a Board member
>Apparently the approach of this WG is to put all
>the complainers (i.e. the trademark/IP people)
>into a position where they have to come up with
>a solution that is both acceptable to them and
>to the rest of the community. In other words it
>is not intended to be an open WG but is
>deliberately intended to be slanted toward them
>with (they hope) the salutary effect of forcing
>them to be constructive and commit themselves to
>accepting whatever they propose.
>Thus, while I agree that Konstantinos has
>expertise in this area and that we should
>leverage it, I think the best way is NOT to put
>him on the group (may not be able to get onto it
>anyway) but to assign him to be our special
>monitor of the results of that group. He can
>assess the results and tell us whether to scream
>against it or to accept it. And draft our
>response. And if it is really bad, help us
>convince other stakeholder groups to oppose it
>as well.
>
>
>Hi Milton,
>
>It may be that different board members have
>different perceptions and agendas (surprise).
> See the snippets below; if what's really
>intended is that the IPC go off and do something
>themselves and other constituencies are merely
>consulted and respond, it would have been good
>to say that more clearly up front, and to frame
>the call for nominations differently.
>
>Maybe I'll hear something clarifying from
>Kristina in response to my suggesting more time
>for nominations. If the real deal is as you
>say, then I guess standing back might be the
>right move.
>
>Nothing like wasting cycles figuring out the fit
>between words and their actual meanings...
>
>BD
>
>
> Transcript
><<http://mex.icann.org/files/meetings/mexico2009/transcript-board-meeting-06mar09-en.txt>http://mex.icann.org/files/meetings/mexico2009/transcript-board-meeting-06mar09-en.txt>
>
>
> >>WENDY SELTZER: So I don't see this
>resolution as an endorsement of any particular
>position, but as an opportunity for the
>community to fully develop its positions so that
>they are bringing to us fully formed proposals
>which we can then act upon. And so I invite --
>and I hope that members of the community will be
>-- of other communities will be consulted early
>in the process, as is recommended, and will have
>full opportunities to analyze proposals that
>come out of this working group to provide us
>with their views as well.
>
> >>DENNIS JENNINGS: Thank you, Peter. I'm
>particularly pleased to see the use of the
>phrase "internationally diverse group of
>persons" in the resolution. Because my
>impression has been that much of the discussion
>has been driven by big business and west -- or
>North American intellectual property interests.
> And I think we've heard other interests speak
>during the week. And I'm very pleased to see
>that because I think there are other dimensions
>that need to be taken into account.
>
> >>RITA RODIN JOHNSTON: Thank you. I guess I
>just want to say -- echo what my colleagues have
>said, which is I think we're very pleased that
>there seems to be broad support for this
>proposal and that members of the community have
>come together to try to determine solutions to
>these issues. I just want to emphasize to
>everyone the board's view here, which is this is
>not being put together -- and we are hopeful
>that this is not going to be a situation where
>there's going to be overreaching or there's
>going to be a stagnation of the process or that
>this is just going to be about big business
>here. We really, really want this to be
>solutions, to be consultative with various
>constituencies, and to give us real and
>collaborative and practical ways to move
>forward. And we're all, actually, very hopeful
>that this is going to be the case and very much
>trust in this process.
>
>
>
>--
>Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,
>Lecturer in Law,
>GigaNet Membership Chair,
>University of Strathclyde,
>The Lord Hope Building,
>141 St. James Road,
>Glasgow, G4 0LT,
>UK
>tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
>email: <>[log in to unmask]
|
