WOW, You should consider running for President with such an impressive resume! :-) regards Karel On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Sam S. <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear all, > > I would like to extend my support to Ed for his nomination for a second > term on the GNSO council. > > When I was just entering the NCSG a few years ago as the youngest member, > there was no one who was more helpful in showing me the ropes. When I first > met him, Ed had a vision of a wholly open and involved process for Internet > Governance, incorporating all groups of stakeholders, including young > people like myself. He was far ahead of the curve on this idea: I just > returned from the Latin American Internet Governance Forum and the Internet > Society now has a group called the Youth Observatory, started specifically > so that younger voices can be heard in internet policy discussions. > > Ed's goal of bringing in new voices shows the type of counselor that he > is; Ed wants to make sure that all voices can be duly heard. > > I think Ed will be able to do a lot of good in his second term, as he has > done in his first. > > - Sam Stern > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> *STATEMENT OF EDWARD MORRIS* >> >> *CANDIDATE FOR RE-ELECTION AS A GNSO COUNCILLOR REPRESENTING THE >> NONCOMMERCIAL USERS STAKEHOLDER GROUP (NCSG)* >> >> • *Name, declared region of residence, gender and employment:* >> >> >> - Edward Morris >> - Europe >> - Male >> - Employment: independent contractor specializing in event management, >> specifically concert management. Clients within the past six months >> include: Doctor Music, Barley Arts, Live Nation, SMG Europe, JLM Group, abc >> Production AG. >> - Academic: Colorado State University: MA in Organizational Leadership >> program. >> >> • *Any conflicts of interest:* >> >> None >> >> • *Reasons for willingness to take on the tasks of the particular >> position:* >> >> 1. I don’t like being told what I can say, 2. I have a passion for many >> of our issues with a skill set we need that is not otherwise represented in >> our Council contingent and 3. Jon Postel was a good guy. >> >> My answers are quite simplistic but they really cut to the base of why >> I’m involved in the NCSG, and why I’m willing to commit to two more years >> to what I’ve found to be an incredible time and energy consuming position. >> >> I’m a free speech guy. Big time. I’m told that as a young boy I used to >> throw toys out of the crib whenever my parents asked me to be quiet. I >> haven’t changed much. I can couch it in sophisticated terms, I can quote >> Milton as in “give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely >> according to conscience, above all liberties”, and others, but my passion >> for free speech comes from my heart rather than from my head. I believe >> that gives it added impact and is a guarantee to you, our Members, that I >> will be vigilant and will battle any attempt to use ICANN to censor the >> internet in any way, shape or form. It’s not just an intellectual >> obligation for me, it’s at the core of who I am. >> >> Intellectual monopoly interests (an older and, in my view, far more >> accurate depiction of the bundle of rights referred to in recent years as >> “intellectual property”) not only are overrepresented everywhere I look at >> ICANN but are attempting to achieve in ICANN what they could not achieve >> through legislation in the wider world. That not only is wrong, it is >> dangerous, threatens free speech and thought, and the NCSG needs to >> continue in our traditional role of opposing the IPC maximalists in ICANN. >> I want to help. >> >> I am the only candidate or returning Councilor with extensive >> intellectual monopoly experience. I have an LLM in IP Law, with >> distinction, from London (Queen Mary), a number of lesser postgraduate >> diplomas in the field, and was a card carrying academic member of the >> International Trademark Association (NTA) for four plus years. Intellectual >> monopoly rights are at the heart of policy discussions at ICANN and I >> believe it is important that at least one NCSG Councilor has some depth of >> knowledge in the field. In fact, when I was hesitating about volunteering >> to continue on Council I was asked to consider serving again for this >> specific reason by some of our Members most involved in intellectual >> monopoly issues. We need someone with IP expertise on Council to ensure >> fair and balanced GNSO output in this field. With your consent, I would >> like to serve that role for the NCSG during the next two years. >> >> My legal experience and experience in statutory drafting (principally for >> the Great and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) is also >> something that differentiates me from the other talented Members who have >> volunteered to serve you on the GNSO Council. This particular aspect of my >> background allows me to perhaps review proposed Charters and Issue Reports >> in a slightly different way than those without legal expertise. We may not >> want an entire contingent of Councilors who think like lawyers, in fact we >> don’t, but one or two are absolutely essential to get the job done properly. >> >> Finally, Jon. For those who don’t know, in the formative days of the >> internet Jon Postel *was* ICANN. Along with Joyce Reynolds, Jon ran the >> names and addressing functions largely by himself out of offices at the >> University of Southern California (USC). I first met Jon when I was a >> freshman at USC and was given a menial work-study job in his office. Jon >> was larger than life, hated shoes, and was really nice to a scared young >> kid 3,000 miles from home. He was the man who taught me by example that it >> was OK just to be myself. >> >> I don’t think Jon would like the modern ICANN very much. Suits, fancy >> watches and bling weren’t his thing. I do think he’d like us, though: Jon >> was about freedom in his personal life, and freedom for everyone in his >> professional life. Bringing ICANN back to the principles Jon lived by and >> believed in is a big part of the reason why I’m in the NCSG. To pay back a >> man, if only a little, who pointed me in the right direction when my own >> life could have gone either way. >> >> >> • *Qualifications for the position:* >> >> When I ran for Council two years ago, many of you did not know me, nor me >> you. So we could get to know each other, I detailed my background quite >> extensively in my 2014 Candidate Statement, which can still be found here: >> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Edward+Morris . >> >> To summarize, I’ve had a career that has taken me through a range of >> positions in government, politics, entertainment and the human rights >> field, working for people as diverse as Edward Kennedy, Gabby Giffords, >> Mary Robinson and Bruce Springsteen. I earned my undergraduate degree from >> the University of Southern California, my principle law degrees are from >> the University of Lapland and the University of London (Queen Mary), and I >> have since acquired a variety of postgraduate degrees and short term >> diplomas from a dozen institutions in nine countries in a variety of fields >> including business, trade law, human rights and cybersecurity. I have a >> tendency to do what I want in life and although the path I’ve chosen has >> not blessed me with a ton of money or security it sure has been an >> interesting journey. >> >> At this point, though, I’d suggest my principle qualification for this >> position is that I am your current councilor. I have a record for you to >> judge and, although I’m never completely satisfied with anything I do, I >> submit I’ve done a fairly decent job for you. I’ve certainly tried. >> >> Effort without success is failure. I don’t like failure. Fortunately I do >> believe I’ve had some areas I can point to where I’ve had some success >> working on your behalf as your GNSO Councilor the past two years. Let me >> highlight a few of them: >> >> >> - Since ICANN was created there has been an effort by the community >> to gain access to documents and financial records used in the functioning >> of the corporation. Karl Auerbach, the last directly elected ICANN Board >> member from North America (fun fact: he beat Larry Lessig for the board >> seat) had to sue ICANN to get Inspection of these records for board >> members, despite having that right under California law. >> >> >> When the CCWG Accountability began on December 9, 2014 I proposed that we >> adopt a membership structure for the corporation. Inspection rights came >> with membership under California law. Membership became our operating model >> for much of the existence of the CCWG. When Board pressure caused the >> community to dump membership, I successfully led the effort to retain >> Inspection rights in the new model, actually holding post midnight >> discussions with the CCWG tri-chairs in Dublin to ensure it was retained. >> When the Board rejected Inspection in their initial evaluation of the CCWG >> proposal I continued to educate, converse with and otherwise lobby Board >> members on the matter. I sent each one of them a Christmas card. In the >> end, the Board not only relented but together we developed an Inspection >> plus model that also included an Investigation right, providing for an >> audit of ICANN by community request under certain circumstances. I know of >> no corporation in California with macro transparency mechanisms this strong. >> >> Lots of people contribute to the making of any policy at ICANN. No >> difference here. That said, I do believe I did make a major contribution to >> this community being able to get these transparency rights placed in the >> Bylaws, rights that had eluded it for a decade and a half. I’m quite sure >> that when I finish my work here this will be my greatest accomplishment in >> this space. >> >> >> >> 1. In February 2015 Westlake Consulting released a report as part of >> the GNSO Review that was devastating to the noncommercial community. Using >> substandard methodology, heresay, and other methodologically improper >> methods the report was a clear hatchet job that imperiled this stakeholder >> group and both constituencies. >> >> >> Working at the Constituency level, with the help of Stefania Milan, I >> constructed a strategic response to Westlake and was principle author of a >> 10 page response that, after having been greatly improved by many NCSG >> members and brilliantly edited by Bill Drake, caused the consulting firm to >> delete most of the offending material. We beat them by producing a more >> professional and scientifically strenuous report than these paid >> consultants could produce. It was a tribute to all of us in the NCSG. >> >> Councilors need to be active defending their Stakeholder Group and >> Constituencies in Council and throughout ICANN. >> >> >> >> - During the past two years I’ve written and have submitted to ICANN >> either as sole author, co-author or principle pen holder 17 public >> comments. The one comment I most prize was one which received a headline in *Domain >> Incite* that read “Odd-couple coalition wants URS deleted from legacy >> gTLD contracts”. >> >> >> This issue was an important one: ICANN’s bypassing of the PDP process by >> contractually imposing new gTLD RPM’s on legacy gTLD’s. What was unique >> about this comment, though, was it’’s authorship: it was a joint comment of >> the NCSG and the Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG). As Kevin Murphy >> wrote, “Commercial and non-commercial interests within ICANN have formed a >> rare alliance in order to oppose the Uniform Rapid Suspension policy in >> three new legacy gTLD contracts”. >> >> The comment was jointly written by myself and Phil Corwin, a fellow GNSO >> Councilor from the Business Constituency. Council offers the opportunity >> for bridge building across Stakeholder Groups. I work well with Phil, as I >> do with many of the other Councilors from the other groups. A further >> example of this was my recent appointment to the GNSO drafting team (DT) >> that will port transition accountability measures into the GNSO. The NCSG >> will have one more representative than any other group because I was >> appointed not by the NCSG policy committee but by a Councilor appointed by >> the Nominating Committee that had appreciated the work I had done in the >> CCWG. >> >> When mutual interests dictate, Councilors need to be proactive working >> with other groups in a cooperative and friendly fashion so all parties can >> achieve the maximum result for those whom they represent. >> >> >> - In March of this year I had the honour of representing the ICANN >> community as a lecturer at USC’s Institute of Internet Policy. Presenting >> alongside Steve Crocker, Fadi Chehade, Vint Cerf, Fiona Alexander and our >> own Wolfgang Kleinwachter, I spoke both of the noncommercial communities >> role in ICANN and of the actual (as opposed to theoretical) way policy is >> made in the organization. >> >> >> As Councilor there are times you are called upon to represent the NCSG >> externally. When asked to do so I do my best to project a professional, >> competent and truthful image. I’ve been invited back to speak at next years >> Institute. >> >> >> These are just a few examples of the things I’ve been working on for you, >> in a wide variety of areas, as one of your GNSO Councilors. >> >> I also made some promises to you when I ran for the Council seat I >> currently hold about my values and how I would conduct myself representing >> you. I hope I’ve kept my word to you: >> >> Attendance: I promised you that if elected I would show up and do my job. >> I have. I have a Council meeting attendance rate of 96.2%. Of the 167 >> participants of the CCWG-Accountability group only 9 attended more meetings >> than I (62 plenary sessions). I achieved perfect attendance on the CCWG >> legal sub-team and achieved attendance rates in excess of 67% in all other >> other CCWG working groups, parties and sub-teams I have been a part of. >> >> -Corporate largess: I promised you that if elected I would not accept any >> gift, drink or food from any corporate entity and that I would not attend >> the Grand Gala’s that for some highlight an ICANN meeting. I have kept my >> word to you in this regard. I don’t judge others but for me to accept >> anything from a corporate party that may have a position on an issue before >> Council would constitute a potential conflict of interest, one that I >> believe prudent to best avoid. >> >> -Contributions: Serving on the GNSO Council is public service to me. It’s >> important to me that I do not financially benefit from this service in any >> way. I pledged that any money I received from ICANN as a stipend for >> meeting attendance that exceeded my expenses I would donate to children’s >> charities at meeting sites. I did so. Small contributions were made to the >> following charities in the name of the NCSG: >> >> >> - Children’s Fund of the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles $110 >> - Catholic Childrens Centre, Singapore 200 Singapore $ >> - I made a donation in Argentina but lost the receipt. I don’t have >> the name or amount. My apology. >> - UNICEF-Morocco $150 >> - Jack and Jill Foundation 90 euro >> - Mannerheim League for Child Welfare 85 euro >> >> >> >> *• Statement of availability for the time the position requires:* >> >> To do this job properly you just can’t sit on Council: you need to be >> active in working groups, read the industry press, attend to the activities >> of the Stakeholder Group and *both *constituencies. I’m currently, >> somehow, active in nine working groups / subgroups, am the rapporteur for >> one, and all of this is in addition to my Council, Stakeholder Group and >> Constituency activities. >> >> I do not have enough time to do all of this. No one does. I do have >> flexibility, money is not the most important thing in my life, and I’m >> willing to give it a go for another two years if you want me to. All I can >> promise is I will do everything I can to do the best I can to keep this >> level of activity going for the next 24 months. I’ll never be a Councilor >> who just shows up for the Meetings: that you can count on. I don’t do >> things half way as the principle of moderation never really appealed to me >> in any area of my life! If you return me to represent you on the GNSO >> Council I will work for you and our mutual interests as hard as I can and >> for as many hours as needed and possible. I take my commitments seriously, >> I show up and I do the work. That’s who I am. >> >> *• The nominee’s statement may also include any other information the >> candidate believes in relevant:* >> >> I’ve had the good fortune of receiving the endorsement of some of this >> communities leading figures. These are people I’ve worked closely with in >> this field for the past two years. If you’re still trying to figure out >> what I’m about and whether you should vote for me I’d ask you to consider >> the comments of those who know best the work I’ve done on your behalf: >> >> NCUC co-founder Kathy Kleiman: >> https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1608&L=NCSG- >> DISCUSS&F=&S=&P=5988 >> >> NPOC Chair Klaus Stoll: >> https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1608&L=NCSG- >> DISCUSS&F=&S=&P=9483 >> >> NCSG PC Chair Marilia Maciel: >> https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1608&L=NCSG- >> DISCUSS&F=&S=&P=96631 >> >> I don’t deserve half of what they have written about me but I’m deeply >> appreciative that they took the time to write what they did. >> >> Going forward, here are a few of the things I’d like to focus on if you >> return me to Council: >> >> 1. Budget – I was the principle author on Council of this years GNSO >> budget comment. The ICANN budget is complicated but with our increased >> community powers post transition now including budgetary approval authority >> we need to have someone with expertise in the matter. I hope to be that >> person and have discussed both with Council leadership and staff the way I >> can continue to increase my knowledge and competence in the area so that I >> can contribute further in this regard; >> >> 2. Council procedure: appointments: Council is not set up to appoint >> people to anything. Yet increasingly that has become one of our primary >> responsibilities. I’ve had discussions with the Council Chair on this >> matter and believe we’ll be setting up a committee to try to create a more >> permament solution in this area. I hope to be able to contribute to that >> effort; >> >> 3. Travel: There has been a bit of a reorganization of the reporting >> structure of the ICANN Travel Department. I’ve been told to expect changes >> in support types, amounts and frequency. Most of our members, including >> myself, are not wealthy and rely upon ICANN support to attend Meetings. I >> intend to monitor this situation and if changes are proposed or imposed I >> will fight to ensure the NCSG is no worse off, and perhaps better off, >> going forward than we are today; >> >> 4. Pro bono commitment to access the IRP: During early stages of the >> CCWG-Accountability we obtained assurances that nonprofits and other less >> than wealthy organisations would be able to obtain some sort of pro bono >> assistance to access the new Independent Review Panels. Somewhere that >> promise has been lost. I intend to do my best to see that it is restored; >> >> 5. Rights Protection Mechanisms: As the CCWG work stream 2 winds down I >> intend to increase my participation in the RPM WG. Eventually I would like >> to make this my principle policy focus in ICANN; >> >> 6. Continued leadership in the CCWG: As rapporteur for the CEP subgroup I >> will lead the efforts in this area and will continue my work on the >> Transparency, Ombudsman and Jurisdiction subgroups. In addition, as an >> appointed member of the Legal Executive I will help manage our independent >> counsel. >> >> I’m sorry to be so expansive but I wanted you to get a full picture of >> what I’ve been doing on your behalf the past two years. I sincerely thank >> you for placing your trust in me, I hope I haven’t let you down, I’ve tried >> my best, and I would be honoured if you would consider returning me to the >> GNSO Council as your representative for a final two year term. >> >> Now for the song. >> >> Two years ago I concluded my statement with a campaign song. It’s a way >> to show everyone where I spend a lot of my time, concerts, but also it’s a >> way for me to send a larger message to everyone, one better conveyed by >> music than by words. Last time I sent everyone a link to “Land of Hope and >> Dreams” with the message that the internet is for everyone. >> >> The NCSG is a great group with a great bunch of people. Yet, sometimes >> things aren’t all that positive here. Disagreement over policy morphs into >> the politics of personal attack. Heck, I’ve been the recipient of a few >> attacks like that and it sucks. Sometimes other groups and people are >> demonized as being evil, to contrast them with the “good” us. I’m not a big >> fan of such bipolar thought. So many good people here yet sometimes we’re >> dragged down into such negativity. It’s bad karma and I personally am not >> comfortable with it. >> >> So my campaign song this year is a hope for a better day, a day when >> mutual respect and caring creates a vibe so positive that people look over >> to us and want to join us because we are just so positive and supportive of >> everyone we come in contact with, friend and perceived enemy >> alike. Wouldn’t that be great? So here’s a message from a guy I just spent >> ten weeks running around Europe with, in a video of mine from Glasgow that >> went a bit viral: Here’s Bruce Springsteen with Waiting On A Sunny Day: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCrzJSUY_4w. May such days be in all our >> futures! >> >> Peace everyone, >> >> Ed >> >> >> >> >> >> *WORKING GROUP / SUBGROUP PARTICIPATION DURING MY FIRST TERM AS YOUR >> COUNCILOR* >> >> *Current:* >> >> - Rapporteur, CCWG, Reviewing the CEP sub-team >> - NCA appointee, Drafting Team on new GNSO rights and obligations under >> the revised ICANN Bylaws >> - Appointed, CCWG, Legal Executive >> - Participant, CCWG - Accountability >> - CCWG, Jurisdiction sub-team >> -CCWG , Ombudsmn sub-team >> -CCWG, Transparency sub-team >> -Review of Rights Protection Mechanisms WG >> -Review of Rights Protection Mechanisms, Trademark Clearinghouse Subgroup >> >> *Past:* >> >> -Participant, CCWG: Accountability >> -Rapporteur, CCWG, Ombudsman sub-team, WS1 >> -CCWG Work party 1 >> -CCWG Work Party 2 >> -CCWG Work Party 2 >> -CCWG Work Party 2 Ombudsmn sub-team >> -CCWG Work Party 2, Independent Review sub-team >> -CCWG Stress Test Work Party >> -CCWG Legal sub-team >> -CCWG Legal sub-team Executive, WS1 >> -CCWG Work Area 1 >> -CCWG Work Area 4 >> -Council, budget working group >> -Council, sexual harassment working group >> >> > > > > -- > -Sam > > >