Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn’t receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise
I did say, more than once, that you should go ahead, but apparently your mail server bounces my mails :-(
Dear All,
We sent this a week ago for your review and we think it would be good to have a call next week before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. We would like to discuss the following issues:
1. The advice from the different legal advisors
2. How to implement and process the advice
How is your availability next week, and how far are you in getting legal advice on the document?
Best, Jonathan and Lise
From: Lise Fuhr Sent: 02 June 2016 15:27 To: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn’t receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise
Dear Lise and all,
Thank you for the suggestion. I think it's useful to confirm and share timelines per implementation steps, with only a few months to go to complete the imeplementation. I'm flexible this week, while at this stage, it would be important to confirm Alan/Paul's availabilities for update on legal advice.
Regards, Izumi
On 2016/06/09 16:32, Lise Fuhr wrote:
Dear All,
We sent this a week ago for your review and we think it would be good to have a call next week before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. We would like to discuss the following issues:
The advice from the different legal advisorsHow to implement and process the adviceHow is your availability next week, and how far are you in getting legal advice on the document?
Best, Jonathan and Lise
From: Lise Fuhr Sent: 02 June 2016 15:27 To: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn’t receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Dear Izumi,
Thank you for your reply. I have discussed it with Jonathan and Greg and we believe it would be good to have a call if possible this week or before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. Maybe German Valdez could help us with setting up a Doodle poll with a relatively short response time so we ensure that Alan/Paul plus one from each of the other communities are present?
Thank you. Best regards, Lise
-----Original Message----- From: Izumi Okutani [mailto:izumi@nic.ad.jp] Sent: 13 June 2016 16:31 To: Lise Fuhr; iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear Lise and all,
Thank you for the suggestion. I think it's useful to confirm and share timelines per implementation steps, with only a few months to go to complete the imeplementation. I'm flexible this week, while at this stage, it would be important to confirm Alan/Paul's availabilities for update on legal advice.
Regards, Izumi
On 2016/06/09 16:32, Lise Fuhr wrote:
Dear All,
We sent this a week ago for your review and we think it would be good to have a call next week before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. We would like to discuss the following issues:
The advice from the different legal advisorsHow to implement and process the adviceHow is your availability next week, and how far are you in getting legal advice on the document?
Best, Jonathan and Lise
From: Lise Fuhr Sent: 02 June 2016 15:27 To: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn't receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
I'm sorry I missed this. I am kind of buried because I'm moving house next Monday (back to Toronto). I'm in all day meetings today and tomorrow and am variously tied up later this week, but I'll reply to a doodle. Probably more important to get the IAD or IETF counsel on the phone.
The IETF is ready, really, to negotiate an agreement along the lines in this document.
A
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its review of the Proposed Principal Terms document. When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group? Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect to hear back about it)?
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s), as a practical matter (though I can understand being ready as a matter of desire to move forward -- by that measure, we're all more than ready, even if we have a number of issues that need to be resolved).
I suppose the same questions apply to NRO/RIRs.....
Greg
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com wrote:
I'm sorry I missed this. I am kind of buried because I'm moving house next Monday (back to Toronto). I'm in all day meetings today and tomorrow and am variously tied up later this week, but I'll reply to a doodle. Probably more important to get the IAD or IETF counsel on the phone.
The IETF is ready, really, to negotiate an agreement along the lines in this document.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its review of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect to hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
Hi
Please complete the below poll at your earliest convenience
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
As per previous agreement the common time we need is with at least one representative from each OC plus Greg
regards
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 1:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its review of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect to hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Hi
Based on previous agreement on representation:
* Greg Shatan * One or both of Lise Fuhr or Jonathan Robinson (CWG) * One or both of Alan Barrett or Paul Wilson (NRO) * One or both of Izumi Okutani or Nurani Nimpuno (CRISP) * One or both of Andrew Sullivan (IAB) or Jari Arkko (IETF)
So far we have Monday June 20th 8:00 AM UTC where all OC are represented, pending confirmation from Greg
As soon as we complete all parties i’ll send the webex details
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 9:30 PM, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Hi
Please complete the below poll at your earliest convenience
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
As per previous agreement the common time we need is with at least one representative from each OC plus Greg
regards
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 1:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its review of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect to hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
8 am UTC is 4 am New York time. That is really bad for me, as I have an early meeting on Monday and thus no chance to recover by sleeping in a bit. Can we find a time that is more mutually comfortable?
Greg
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Hi
Based on previous agreement on representation:
- Greg Shatan
- One or both of Lise Fuhr or Jonathan Robinson (CWG)
- One or both of Alan Barrett or Paul Wilson (NRO)
- One or both of Izumi Okutani or Nurani Nimpuno (CRISP)
- One or both of Andrew Sullivan (IAB) or Jari Arkko (IETF)
So far we have Monday June 20th 8:00 AM UTC where all OC are represented, pending confirmation from Greg
As soon as we complete all parties i’ll send the webex details
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 9:30 PM, German Valdez <german@nro.net javascript:;>
wrote:
Hi
Please complete the below poll at your earliest convenience
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
As per previous agreement the common time we need is with at least one
representative from each OC plus Greg
regards
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 1:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
javascript:;> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its
review
of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we
expect to
hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com javascript:;
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Greg,
Please can you fill in your ability asap.
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Sent: 15 June 2016 17:25 To: German Valdez german@nro.net Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net; Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
8 am UTC is 4 am New York time. That is really bad for me, as I have an early meeting on Monday and thus no chance to recover by sleeping in a bit. Can we find a time that is more mutually comfortable?
Greg
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016, German Valdez <german@nro.net mailto:german@nro.net > wrote:
Hi
Based on previous agreement on representation:
* Greg Shatan * One or both of Lise Fuhr or Jonathan Robinson (CWG) * One or both of Alan Barrett or Paul Wilson (NRO) * One or both of Izumi Okutani or Nurani Nimpuno (CRISP) * One or both of Andrew Sullivan (IAB) or Jari Arkko (IETF)
So far we have Monday June 20th 8:00 AM UTC where all OC are represented, pending confirmation from Greg
As soon as we complete all parties i’ll send the webex details
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 9:30 PM, German Valdez <german@nro.net javascript:; > wrote:
Hi
Please complete the below poll at your earliest convenience
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
As per previous agreement the common time we need is with at least one representative from each OC plus Greg
regards
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 1:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com javascript:; > wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its review of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect to hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com javascript:;
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Filled out the Doodle.
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:17 AM, Jonathan Robinson jrobinson@afilias.info wrote:
Greg,
Please can you fill in your ability asap.
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Sent:* 15 June 2016 17:25 *To:* German Valdez german@nro.net *Cc:* iana-ipr@nro.net; Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com *Subject:* Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
8 am UTC is 4 am New York time. That is really bad for me, as I have an early meeting on Monday and thus no chance to recover by sleeping in a bit. Can we find a time that is more mutually comfortable?
Greg
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Hi
Based on previous agreement on representation:
- Greg Shatan
- One or both of Lise Fuhr or Jonathan Robinson (CWG)
- One or both of Alan Barrett or Paul Wilson (NRO)
- One or both of Izumi Okutani or Nurani Nimpuno (CRISP)
- One or both of Andrew Sullivan (IAB) or Jari Arkko (IETF)
So far we have Monday June 20th 8:00 AM UTC where all OC are represented, pending confirmation from Greg
As soon as we complete all parties i’ll send the webex details
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 9:30 PM, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Hi
Please complete the below poll at your earliest convenience
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
As per previous agreement the common time we need is with at least one
representative from each OC plus Greg
regards
German
On 14 Jun 2016, at 1:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its
review
of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we
expect to
hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Alan Barrett
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Based on the input received please refer to the below url for this call
Tuesday June 21st 1 pm UTC
Regards
German
===
IPR IANA Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:00 pm | UTC 1 hr Meeting number (access code): 709 854 002 Meeting password: IPROC
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m392435add9590e98b1f03848450529... oin by phone 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=469...
On 17 Jun 2016, at 6:12 PM, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Reminder of today IPR Call.
regards
German
On 17 Jun 2016, at 9:51 PM, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Based on the input received please refer to the below url for this call
Tuesday June 21st 1 pm UTC
Regards
German
===
IPR IANA Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:00 pm | UTC 1 hr Meeting number (access code): 709 854 002 Meeting password: IPROC
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m392435add9590e98b1f03848450529... oin by phone 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=469...
On 17 Jun 2016, at 6:12 PM, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Dear all,
Apologies, I cannot make it to the call today at UTC13:00 as it clashes with another call (IGF MAG) - the poll was conducted in parallel and the times coincided unfortunately. I see Alan and Nurani are available, so it should not affect the quorum but sorry about the change.
Regards, Izumi
On 2016/06/21 13:32, German Valdez wrote:
Reminder of today IPR Call.
regards
German
On 17 Jun 2016, at 9:51 PM, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Based on the input received please refer to the below url for this call
Tuesday June 21st 1 pm UTC
Regards
German
===
IPR IANA Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:00 pm | UTC 1 hr Meeting number (access code): 709 854 002 Meeting password: IPROC
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m392435add9590e98b1f03848450529... oin by phone 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=469...
On 17 Jun 2016, at 6:12 PM, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Joining now.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:01 AM, Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp wrote:
Dear all,
Apologies, I cannot make it to the call today at UTC13:00 as it clashes with another call (IGF MAG) - the poll was conducted in parallel and the times coincided unfortunately. I see Alan and Nurani are available, so it should not affect the quorum but sorry about the change.
Regards, Izumi
On 2016/06/21 13:32, German Valdez wrote:
Reminder of today IPR Call.
regards
German
On 17 Jun 2016, at 9:51 PM, German Valdez german@nro.net wrote:
Based on the input received please refer to the below url for this call
Tuesday June 21st 1 pm UTC
Regards
German
===
IPR IANA Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:00 pm | UTC 1 hr Meeting number (access code): 709 854 002 Meeting password: IPROC
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m392435add9590e98b1f03848450529... oin by phone 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=469...
On 17 Jun 2016, at 6:12 PM, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net
wrote:
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net
wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
http://doodle.com/poll/g99cu7sxqn6mnf78
>
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
having trouble joining in. will try one more time and then downgrading to phone call.
All,
Following the call today, I agree to share a set of actions arising from our discussion.
As I have noted them, they are as follows:
1. The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to this (IANA IPR) group. 2. We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting (Jonathan / Lise to arrange) 3. It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a) members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German? 4. Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF Trust legal counsel (Andrew). These will be sent this group for review once drafted
Please review and provide comment regarding any errors or omissions.
In addition, I understood that Sidley will be asked to provide a draft the Community Agreement and I am not clear who will lead on the IPR assignment from ICANN (ICANN Legal?)
Thank-you,
Jonathan
-----Original Message----- From: German Valdez [mailto:german@nro.net] Sent: 17 June 2016 12:51 To: Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Based on the input received please refer to the below url for this call
Tuesday June 21st 1 pm UTC
Regards
German
===
IPR IANA Tuesday, June 21, 2016 1:00 pm | UTC 1 hr Meeting number (access code): 709 854 002 Meeting password: IPROC
https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=m392435add9590e98b1f03848450529 92 oin by phone 0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK) +44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK) Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=469... 22&tollFree=1
On 17 Jun 2016, at 6:12 PM, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 17 Jun 2016, at 12:10, Alan Barrett alan.barrett@afrinic.net wrote:
On 16 Jun 2016, at 18:59, Greg Shatan gregshatanipc@gmail.com wrote:
Filled out the Doodle.
Tuesday 21 June at 14:00 UTC seems like the best time.
Sorry, I meant 13:00 UTC.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
_______________________________________________ Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
On 21 Jun 2016, at 21:09, Jonathan Robinson jrobinson@afilias.info wrote:
All,
Following the call today, I agree to share a set of actions arising from our discussion.
As I have noted them, they are as follows:
- The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the
Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to this (IANA IPR) group.
OK.
- We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues
and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting (Jonathan / Lise to arrange)
I think that those of us in the iana-ipr group can manage the project, but it would be nice if ICANN tracked the progress.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
- Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF
Trust legal counsel (Andrew). These will be sent this group for review once drafted
Please review and provide comment regarding any errors or omissions.
In addition, I understood that Sidley will be asked to provide a draft the Community Agreement and I am not clear who will lead on the IPR assignment from ICANN (ICANN Legal?)
I agree on the IETF Trust taking the lead on drafting the licenses for ICANN to use the IPR.
For the community agreeement, at least for the names community, it makes sense for Sidley to draft. However, I don’t think we have made a decision on how many community agreements there will be (see my other email message, subject “Decisions to be made soon”).
I expect that the agreement for assignment of IPR from ICANN to the IETF Trust will be quite straightforward, and I suggest that the IETF Trust could take the lead in drafting it.
Alan Barrett
Hell all,
I would like to follow up about a meeting in Helsinki.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
German, Would you help in confirming everyone's availabilities, fix date and time and arrange a room?
Paul :Leaves on Wednesday and is available on Tue 1300-1500. Alan: Flexible Nurani: TBC Izumi: Flexible *except* 1) Tue 0930-1030 (IANA & CCWG WS1 session) 2) Tue lunch (1200-1315), and 3) Wed lunch (1215-1345), Wed evening (2000-)
We may want to consider early morning (breakfast) meeting or early evening meeting as an option, depending on everyone's availabilities.
I note Andrew cannot join us in person. I think we can accommodate some form of remote participation if he would be available (but also understand if cannot join ).
Izumi
On 2016/06/22 17:52, Alan Barrett wrote:
On 21 Jun 2016, at 21:09, Jonathan Robinson jrobinson@afilias.info wrote:
All,
Following the call today, I agree to share a set of actions arising from our discussion.
As I have noted them, they are as follows:
- The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the
Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to this (IANA IPR) group.
OK.
- We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues
and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting (Jonathan / Lise to arrange)
I think that those of us in the iana-ipr group can manage the project, but it would be nice if ICANN tracked the progress.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
- Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF
Trust legal counsel (Andrew). These will be sent this group for review once drafted
Please review and provide comment regarding any errors or omissions.
In addition, I understood that Sidley will be asked to provide a draft the Community Agreement and I am not clear who will lead on the IPR assignment from ICANN (ICANN Legal?)
I agree on the IETF Trust taking the lead on drafting the licenses for ICANN to use the IPR.
For the community agreeement, at least for the names community, it makes sense for Sidley to draft. However, I don’t think we have made a decision on how many community agreements there will be (see my other email message, subject “Decisions to be made soon”).
I expect that the agreement for assignment of IPR from ICANN to the IETF Trust will be quite straightforward, and I suggest that the IETF Trust could take the lead in drafting it.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Hi
Please could other provides their availability this week here in the list so we can check if we a have a common time where all operational communities are represented.
Based on that time I could liaise with ICANN staff for a meeting room.
Looking forward to receiving you information
Regards
German
On 27 Jun 2016, at 11:29 AM, Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp wrote:
Hell all,
I would like to follow up about a meeting in Helsinki.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
German, Would you help in confirming everyone's availabilities, fix date and time and arrange a room?
Paul :Leaves on Wednesday and is available on Tue 1300-1500. Alan: Flexible Nurani: TBC Izumi: Flexible *except* 1) Tue 0930-1030 (IANA & CCWG WS1 session) 2) Tue lunch (1200-1315), and 3) Wed lunch (1215-1345), Wed evening (2000-)
We may want to consider early morning (breakfast) meeting or early evening meeting as an option, depending on everyone's availabilities.
I note Andrew cannot join us in person. I think we can accommodate some form of remote participation if he would be available (but also understand if cannot join ).
Izumi
On 2016/06/22 17:52, Alan Barrett wrote:
On 21 Jun 2016, at 21:09, Jonathan Robinson jrobinson@afilias.info wrote:
All,
Following the call today, I agree to share a set of actions arising from our discussion.
As I have noted them, they are as follows:
- The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the
Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to this (IANA IPR) group.
OK.
- We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues
and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting (Jonathan / Lise to arrange)
I think that those of us in the iana-ipr group can manage the project, but it would be nice if ICANN tracked the progress.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
- Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF
Trust legal counsel (Andrew). These will be sent this group for review once drafted
Please review and provide comment regarding any errors or omissions.
In addition, I understood that Sidley will be asked to provide a draft the Community Agreement and I am not clear who will lead on the IPR assignment from ICANN (ICANN Legal?)
I agree on the IETF Trust taking the lead on drafting the licenses for ICANN to use the IPR.
For the community agreeement, at least for the names community, it makes sense for Sidley to draft. However, I don’t think we have made a decision on how many community agreements there will be (see my other email message, subject “Decisions to be made soon”).
I expect that the agreement for assignment of IPR from ICANN to the IETF Trust will be quite straightforward, and I suggest that the IETF Trust could take the lead in drafting it.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Hi all, Here is my availability.
On 27 juni 2016, at 11:29, Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp wrote:
Paul :Leaves on Wednesday and is available on Tue 1300-1500. Alan: Flexible Nurani:
Flexible except 1) Mon 17.00, 2) Tue 11-12, 3) Thu, 9:00-15:00 (ASO AC f2f)
I have a few other moving parts still in my schedule, but will try to work around this if possible. Nurani
Izumi: Flexible *except* 1) Tue 0930-1030 (IANA & CCWG WS1 session) 2) Tue lunch (1200-1315), and 3) Wed lunch (1215-1345), Wed evening (2000-)
We may want to consider early morning (breakfast) meeting or early evening meeting as an option, depending on everyone's availabilities.
I note Andrew cannot join us in person. I think we can accommodate some form of remote participation if he would be available (but also understand if cannot join ).
Izumi
On 2016/06/22 17:52, Alan Barrett wrote:
On 21 Jun 2016, at 21:09, Jonathan Robinson jrobinson@afilias.info wrote:
All,
Following the call today, I agree to share a set of actions arising from our discussion.
As I have noted them, they are as follows:
- The key questions and issues arising from the Sidley review of the
Principal Terms need to be organised, reviewed and dealt with. CWG Stewardship (Names) will tabulate these for ease of processing. Issues needing resolution by CWG only will be dealt with by CWG. Issues needing resolution by all three operations communities will be referred back to this (IANA IPR) group.
OK.
- We will utilise ICANN project management staff to track the key issues
and integrate this (IANA IPR) stream of work into the overall project tracking and reporting (Jonathan / Lise to arrange)
I think that those of us in the iana-ipr group can manage the project, but it would be nice if ICANN tracked the progress.
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I agree that a meeting would be useful.
- Draft agreements for three licences of the IPR are being prepared by IETF
Trust legal counsel (Andrew). These will be sent this group for review once drafted
Please review and provide comment regarding any errors or omissions.
In addition, I understood that Sidley will be asked to provide a draft the Community Agreement and I am not clear who will lead on the IPR assignment from ICANN (ICANN Legal?)
I agree on the IETF Trust taking the lead on drafting the licenses for ICANN to use the IPR.
For the community agreeement, at least for the names community, it makes sense for Sidley to draft. However, I don’t think we have made a decision on how many community agreements there will be (see my other email message, subject “Decisions to be made soon”).
I expect that the agreement for assignment of IPR from ICANN to the IETF Trust will be quite straightforward, and I suggest that the IETF Trust could take the lead in drafting it.
Alan Barrett
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Would like to have a meeting.
I’m flexible, and any time except the following will work:
Tuesday 09:30-10:30 Tuesday 18:00-24:00 Wednesday 10:45-12:00 Wednesday 17:00-24:00 Thursday 12:30-13:30 Friday all day
Jari
I can do Tuesday after 15:00 and before 19:00 and Wednesday from 8:00 - 12:00
Best, Lise
-----Original Message----- From: iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net [mailto:iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko Sent: 27 June 2016 15:33 To: Izumi Okutani Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Would like to have a meeting.
I'm flexible, and any time except the following will work:
Tuesday 09:30-10:30 Tuesday 18:00-24:00 Wednesday 10:45-12:00 Wednesday 17:00-24:00 Thursday 12:30-13:30 Friday all day
Jari
I can do Tuesday between 15:00 and 18:30. I can't do Wednesday morning.
Greg
On Monday, June 27, 2016, Lise Fuhr Fuhr@etno.eu wrote:
I can do Tuesday after 15:00 and before 19:00 and Wednesday from 8:00 - 12:00
Best, Lise
-----Original Message----- From: iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net javascript:; [mailto: iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net javascript:;] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko Sent: 27 June 2016 15:33 To: Izumi Okutani Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Would like to have a meeting.
I'm flexible, and any time except the following will work:
Tuesday 09:30-10:30 Tuesday 18:00-24:00 Wednesday 10:45-12:00 Wednesday 17:00-24:00 Thursday 12:30-13:30 Friday all day
Jari
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
It looks like Tue sometime between 15:00-1800(local time:UTC+3) accommodates the maximum participants.
Alan, Greg, Jari, Lise, Nurani, Izumi: available Andrew(remote): ? Jonathan:? Paul: unavailable
German, let's wait to hear from Andrew if he is available remotely and Jonathan until 09:00am (UTC+3) Tue. I leave it to you to fix time between 15:00-18:00 tomorrow for an hour, per meeting space availability. Please also issue Webex invitation if Andrew can join.
Thanks, Izumi
On 2016/06/28 0:11, Greg Shatan wrote:
I can do Tuesday between 15:00 and 18:30. I can't do Wednesday morning.
Greg
On Monday, June 27, 2016, Lise Fuhr Fuhr@etno.eu wrote:
I can do Tuesday after 15:00 and before 19:00 and Wednesday from 8:00 - 12:00
Best, Lise
-----Original Message----- From: iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net javascript:; [mailto: iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net javascript:;] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko Sent: 27 June 2016 15:33 To: Izumi Okutani Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Would like to have a meeting.
I'm flexible, and any time except the following will work:
Tuesday 09:30-10:30 Tuesday 18:00-24:00 Wednesday 10:45-12:00 Wednesday 17:00-24:00 Thursday 12:30-13:30 Friday all day
Jari
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net javascript:; https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:41:02AM +0900, Izumi Okutani wrote:
It looks like Tue sometime between 15:00-1800(local time:UTC+3) accommodates the maximum participants.
Alan, Greg, Jari, Lise, Nurani, Izumi: available Andrew(remote): ?
I can perhaps make this.
The RDS PDP is meeting tonight between 01:00 and 05:00 my time.
Today was supposed to be move in day. I just got back, however, and no stuff is here because the mover who brought the stuff was not actually prepared for moving things to downtown Toronto (his truck was too big). So I still have no bed.
What shape I'll be in after the PDP is anyone's guess, and whether I'll make it to that is also an open question.
So, I say that I'll try to make it, but you should feel ok to start without me.
A
Sorry for coming in late but I can do 17h00 in that window.
So ... the proposal is 17h00 local time here in Helsinki.
Thanks,
Jonathan
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com] Sent: 27 June 2016 23:52 To: Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:41:02AM +0900, Izumi Okutani wrote:
It looks like Tue sometime between 15:00-1800(local time:UTC+3)
accommodates the maximum participants.
Alan, Greg, Jari, Lise, Nurani, Izumi: available Andrew(remote): ?
I can perhaps make this.
The RDS PDP is meeting tonight between 01:00 and 05:00 my time.
Today was supposed to be move in day. I just got back, however, and no stuff is here because the mover who brought the stuff was not actually prepared for moving things to downtown Toronto (his truck was too big). So I still have no bed.
What shape I'll be in after the PDP is anyone's guess, and whether I'll make it to that is also an open question.
So, I say that I'll try to make it, but you should feel ok to start without me.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
_______________________________________________ Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Thanks Jonathan.
German, please help us find room for tomorrow Tue 28th June 1700 Helsinki time (UTC+3).
Izumi
On 2016/06/28 6:27, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
Sorry for coming in late but I can do 17h00 in that window.
So ... the proposal is 17h00 local time here in Helsinki.
Thanks,
Jonathan
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com] Sent: 27 June 2016 23:52 To: Izumi Okutani izumi@nic.ad.jp Cc: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:41:02AM +0900, Izumi Okutani wrote:
It looks like Tue sometime between 15:00-1800(local time:UTC+3)
accommodates the maximum participants.
Alan, Greg, Jari, Lise, Nurani, Izumi: available Andrew(remote): ?
I can perhaps make this.
The RDS PDP is meeting tonight between 01:00 and 05:00 my time.
Today was supposed to be move in day. I just got back, however, and no stuff is here because the mover who brought the stuff was not actually prepared for moving things to downtown Toronto (his truck was too big). So I still have no bed.
What shape I'll be in after the PDP is anyone's guess, and whether I'll make it to that is also an open question.
So, I say that I'll try to make it, but you should feel ok to start without me.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
Understood your situation Andrew. Thank you for letting us know. I think you need some rest (while you are always welcome to join in case you still have energy left without stretching yourself).
All the best in completing the moving and getting your bed!
On 2016/06/28 5:52, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:41:02AM +0900, Izumi Okutani wrote:
It looks like Tue sometime between 15:00-1800(local time:UTC+3) accommodates the maximum participants.
Alan, Greg, Jari, Lise, Nurani, Izumi: available Andrew(remote): ?
I can perhaps make this.
The RDS PDP is meeting tonight between 01:00 and 05:00 my time.
Today was supposed to be move in day. I just got back, however, and no stuff is here because the mover who brought the stuff was not actually prepared for moving things to downtown Toronto (his truck was too big). So I still have no bed.
What shape I'll be in after the PDP is anyone's guess, and whether I'll make it to that is also an open question.
So, I say that I'll try to make it, but you should feel ok to start without me.
A
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 06:09:57PM +0100, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
- It will be useful if we can meet face to face in Helsinki subject to (a)
members of this group being in Helsinki and (b) a mutually convenient time slot. Who will schedule this? German?
I now can confirm that I will not be in Helsinki, because my movers aren't getting here until Monday.
A
It was my understanding that we (this group) were awaiting feedback (mark-up/comment) from IETF's counsel and from NRO's counsel. Indeed, CWG originally held off on sending the document to our counsel; our plan was to send our counsel a package that included the other communities' counsels' comments on the document. We only sent the document to CWG counsel after being told (possibly more than once) that IETF's counsel's feedback was not imminent.
Until I asked my question above, it was my still understanding that we were waiting for that feedback. I don't believe I was alone in that understanding. I'm a bit surprised to find we are not waiting for anyhing. I didn't see anything sent to this list that said IETF's counsel had reviewed and signed off on the document (something saying the Trust was okay with the document would not have conveyed anything about what counsel was doing or saying).
It was also my understanding that we would be weighing and trying to "harmonize" the feedback from each group's counsel . It's typical when multiple parties are working on a document for counsel to have a mark-up and/or comments that is sent to the other parties (apart from whatever feedback they gave solely to their client).
I suppose what you're saying is that IETF's counsel had no mark-up or comments to give to the other parties and that the document is acceptable "as is" (as a jumping off point for the full agreements).
Well, at least this has been clarified.
Greg
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Greg Shatan wrote:
It's my understanding that IETF's counsel has not yet completed its
review
of the Proposed Principal Terms document.
Nope, I sent something to the list some while ago saying the Trust said it was ok with it.
When does IETF expect to receive counsel's review and circulate it to this group?
We don't expect to circulate it to this group. That's a review delivered to the Trust so the Trust could decide what to do.
Also, has the IETF or IETF's counsel seen Sidley's mark-up yet (and if so, when can we expect
to
hear back about it)?
I have circulated it, yes. I'll poke again.
Without these steps, it doesn't seem that the IETF can be ready to negotiate the agreement(s)
Why? We're ready to instruct our counsel to go negotiate based on this set of principles.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
I agree Lise.
German, would you help us with setting a doodle poll and fixing the meeting time? From the numbers, it is not a must for me to join as long as Alan/Paul are available.
FYI, this is the progress I have shared with the CRISP Team on IPR Status: https://www.nro.net/pipermail/crisp/2016-June/002528.html
Many thanks Andrew for the update from the IETF - I have updated to the CRISP Team that the IETF is ready.
Izumi
On 2016/06/14 1:43, Lise Fuhr wrote:
Dear Izumi,
Thank you for your reply. I have discussed it with Jonathan and Greg and we believe it would be good to have a call if possible this week or before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. Maybe German Valdez could help us with setting up a Doodle poll with a relatively short response time so we ensure that Alan/Paul plus one from each of the other communities are present?
Thank you. Best regards, Lise
-----Original Message----- From: Izumi Okutani [mailto:izumi@nic.ad.jp] Sent: 13 June 2016 16:31 To: Lise Fuhr; iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Re: [Iana-ipr] Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear Lise and all,
Thank you for the suggestion. I think it's useful to confirm and share timelines per implementation steps, with only a few months to go to complete the imeplementation. I'm flexible this week, while at this stage, it would be important to confirm Alan/Paul's availabilities for update on legal advice.
Regards, Izumi
On 2016/06/09 16:32, Lise Fuhr wrote:
Dear All,
We sent this a week ago for your review and we think it would be good to have a call next week before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. We would like to discuss the following issues:
The advice from the different legal advisorsHow to implement and process the adviceHow is your availability next week, and how far are you in getting legal advice on the document?
Best, Jonathan and Lise
From: Lise Fuhr Sent: 02 June 2016 15:27 To: iana-ipr@nro.net Subject: Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn't receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
On 9 Jun 2016, at 11:32, Lise Fuhr Fuhr@etno.eu wrote:
Dear All,
We sent this a week ago for your review and we think it would be good to have a call next week before the ICANN meeting in Helsinki. We would like to discuss the following issues:
The advice from the different legal advisorsHow to implement and process the adviceHow is your availability next week, and how far are you in getting legal advice on the document?
My availability this week and next week is quite good.
The RIRs' legal team is generally comfortable with the document, but suggests having three licences for the parts of the AINA functions associated with the three operational communities, instead of just one licence. All three licences would be in favour of ICANN or PTI, but having separate licences for the separate parts of the job might make it easier in the future if some subset of the operational communities decides to move to a different IANA operator.
Alan Barrett
The RIRs' legal team is generally comfortable with the document, but suggests having three licences for the parts of the AINA functions associated with the three operational communities, instead of just one licence. All three licences would be in favour of ICANN or PTI, but having separate licences for the separate parts of the job might make it easier in the future if some subset of the operational communities decides to move to a different IANA operator.
Personally, that sounds reasonable.
Jari
I have pasted the suggested changes from Sidley’s document into the google docs file, and made a few comments of my own.
Alan Barrett
On 2 Jun 2016, at 17:26, Lise Fuhr Fuhr@etno.eu wrote:
Dear All,
The CWG first assumed that we would work in consecutive order with the IPR document and the legal advisors. We flagged this to this group, but since we apparently didn’t receive any legal input from either of you (please bear with us if we are wrong and resend any input) we went ahead and asked for legal advice on the document. We got this advice very recently and are about to send it to the CWG for discussion. In order to keep you informed we enclose the preliminary response from our advisors including their questions. If you have any response from your advisors please share them with us in order to continue the dialogue.
Best regards, Jonathan and Lise <Redline Proposed Principal Terms of IANA Intellectual Property Agreements (Sidley 0531 vs Original).pdf>_______________________________________________ Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
participants (9)
-
Alan Barrett -
Andrew Sullivan -
German Valdez -
Greg Shatan -
Izumi Okutani -
Jari Arkko -
Jonathan Robinson -
Lise Fuhr -
Nurani Nimpuno