RE: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting Thursday 18 Nov 2004
I assume then that there will be general agreement that the Board should not
reach any decision based upon the Staff Recommendation alone. That conclusion,
if agreed by the GNSO (which I suppose should be the topic during the call)
should be conveyed to the Board asap.
Lucy
-----Original Message-----
From: marc@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:marc@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of ext Marc
Schneiders
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:49 AM
To: Nichols Lucy (Nokia/Dallas)
Cc: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting Thursday 18 Nov
2004
Lucy, I am not sure it is a good idea to let the Board make a decision
without involving the GNSO... That is certainly not what I had in
mind.
Regards,
Marc
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, at 14:44 [=GMT+0200], Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Marc-
>
> I agree ...no final decision should be made on this issue.
>
> The IPC's primary concern is that the ICANN Staff and President will be
> making a recommendation regarding WIPO II and that the Board could make a
> decision based upon that recommendation prior to our knowing/discussing the
> recommendation. Certainly, we need to have some idea of where the
> Staff/President are generally coming out on this and more specifically the
> nature of their recommendation --- particularly since no consensus has been
> reached on this issue.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lucy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of ext Marc Schneiders
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 11:10 AM
> To: Marilyn Cade
> Cc: 'Bruce Tonkin'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting Thursday 18 Nov
> 2004
>
>
> This is a pretty serious topic, I agree, as another elected rep. I do
> not mind at all that we discuss this tomorrow. I would oppose though
> any attempt to rush anything through tomorrow. Be it dismissing the
> whole WIPO II request (which my constituency wouldn't mind as such) or
> taking some position. We need serious discussion about this topic,
> which cannot be accomplished in one teleconference as such short
> notice. I suggest we discuss WIPO II on this list before we make _any_
> decision. Thanks.
>
> Marc Schneiders
>
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, at 19:52 [=GMT-0500], Marilyn Cade wrote:
>
> > Dear Bruce,
> > As an elected rep to the BC on Council, I support the request for
> > information and offer the following thought:
> >
> > The working group on WIPO II did not achieve consensus.
> > Changes in policy by ICANN require consensus
> > In the BC, we have received inquiries from our members, regarding the action
> > of the ICANN regarding this issue.
> >
> > I want to support raisign this issue in Council to a priority level, and
> > noting to the Board and staff that there is no support to make changes,
> > given that there is no consensus in the working group.
> >
> > I welcome the opportunity to discuss this within Council and will be on
> > Thursday's call. I have to leave at 3:30 EST, so ask that this issue be
> > raised between 2 and 3:00 p.m. so that I can help to address it.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Marilyn
> >
>
>