My apologies for my delayed reply due to travel. If it's not too
late, I'm glad to say that I will support the redrafted version of the
letter.
My thanks to Stephane and the rest of the DT for taking this on, and in
particular for amending the letter to reflect concerns expressed on this
list.
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
>>>
Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx> 5/15/2009 1:48 PM >>>
sure
thing.
I am assuming that even with these abstentions, this is still
worth
sending. Those of you who haven't abstained, please let
the list know
if this assumption is in error in the next few
hours.
thanks
a.
Dear Janis,
Attached please find
a letter from the GNSO Council written in
response to your opem
letter of April 24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This
communication
has been approved by the GNSO Council with the noted
abstention of the Commercial and Business Constituency,
Internet
Service Providers and Connectivity
Providers
Constituency, and of Kristina Rosette. Additionally Mary
Wong, as an
active participant in the Implementation Recommendation
Team (IRT),
felt that support of this document at this time might be
inconsistent
with her work as part of the IRT and has also
abstained.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for accepting
our comment
at this time. The GNSO Council looks forward to
discussing the issue
with the GAC at our joint meeting in
Sydney.
Best Regards,
On 15 May 2009, at 18:41, Tony Holmes
wrote:
>
> Avri
>
> Although this is a letter from
the GNSO Council rather than the GNSO
> there's
> been
considerable discussion over this within the ISPCP Constituency
>
and as
> a result we're unable to offer support for the
letter.
>
> In addition to specific concerns that some ISPCP
members have
> expressed
> there is also an overriding view
that the GNSO Council doesn't have
> to offer
> a response
on such a controversial issue and at this stage it should
> be
left
> to the Board.
>
> Could I ask that the note you
propose below is subject to a minor
> amendment
> that adds
the Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers
> Constituency
to the abstention.
>
> Regards
>
>
Tony
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ]
On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: 15 May 2009 06:13
> To:
Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Proposed cover letter for GNSO Letter
to GAC
>
>
> I propose sending the the following to the GAC
later today. I would
> especially be interested in receiving
confirmation from the BC,
> Kristina and Mary on the accuracy of the
statement I have included on
> your abstentions.
>
>
---
>
> Dear Janis,
>
> Attached please find a letter
from the GNSO Council written in
> response to your opem letter of April
24 2009 to the ICANN CEO. This
> communication has been approved
by the GNSO Council with the noted
> abstention of the Commercial and
Business Constituency. Additionally
> both Kristina Rosette and Mary
Wong, as active participants in the
> Implementation Recommendation Team
(IRT), felt that support of this
> document at this time might be
inconsistent with their work as part of
> the IRT and have also
abstained.
>
> Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for
accepting our comment
> at this time. The GNSO Council looks
forward to discussing the issue
> with the GAC at our joint meeting in
Sydney.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
>
> The
attachment will include Stéphane's 13 May version of the the
> letter
with changes accepted and date updated.
>
> thanks
>
>
a.
>
>
>
>
>