October 2012 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Prague Schedule / Tuesday 16 October 2012
by At-Large Staff July 17, 2013

July 17, 2013

Dear All, Please find hereafter the At-Large schedule for tomorrow, Tuesday 16 October 2012 with all remote participation details listed on the ICANN Schedule: Wiki Agenda page: http://tinyurl.com/9h95fo6 ICANN Schedule: http://toronto45.icann.org/full-schedule Meeting Room Map: http://toronto45.icann.org/files/meetings/toronto2012/45-Toronto-VenueMap-3O ct12.png * 07:00 - 08:00 NARALO Capacity Building Session 2 Regatta Room http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34285 * 08:00 - 09:00 Joint NARALO / Fellows Meeting 2 Frontenac http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34283 * 08:30 09:30: Meeting with ICANN Board Metro East http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34289 * 10:00 - 11:00: At-Large Capacity Building: Next Steps Regatta http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34307 * 11:00 13:00: ALAC Policy Discussion Part 1 Regatta http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34313 13:00 - 14:00 LUNCH break * 14:00 16:00: ALAC Policy Discussion Part 2 Regatta http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34327 * 16:00 - 17:00: Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Working Group Regatta http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34353 * 17:00 18:00: At-Large Outreach Sub-Committee Meeting Regatta http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34361 General Meetings: Please refer to full Schedule: http://prague44.icann.org/full-schedule Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

4 14

ALAC/At-Large Mailing Lists
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 2, 2012

Nov. 2, 2012

While working on the Rules of Procedure, it became obvious that we needed a document describing the various ALAC mailing lists giving a summary of their usage and describing who must of should be subscribed. This list will not include RALO lists or the multitude of working group and committee lists Currently there are five such lists. All are archived and are publicly viewable except as noted. ALAC - General ALAC list used for the majority of ALAC e-mail interactions. Originally only ALAC members, RALO leadership, formal Liaisons selected by the ALAC, Liaisons to the ALAC, At-Large Board member and Staff were on it. More recently, it has included (either by accident or intentionally), selected former ALAC member, selected former RALO leadership, and others. (I am using the term "formal Liaisons" to refer to the ccNSO, GNSO and SSAC Liaisons - those to other ICANN or external bodies.) ALAC-Internal - Used for things that we do not want to be publicly viewable. Most commonly, this is travel arrangements, social plans and occasionally semi-confidential issues or issues where we want targeted ALAC feedback. Membership is similar to the ALAC list, but no "others" ALAC-ExCom - Publicly viewable list for the ALAC ExCom. Membership is traditionally ExCom members, formal Liaisons appointed by the ALAC, and Staff. More recently a few others were added. ALAC-Announce - General list for announcements. Only ICANN staff and the ALAC Chair (I think) have sending privileges. This list includes pretty much everyone in the ALAC list plus about 175 others. At-Large - General public list. This list has Most but not all of those onthe ALAC list (missing about 10 ALAC members and RALO leadership) plus about 160 others. ALAC-Announce and At-Large membership overlaps. There are 98 people on both lists (about 1/3 of which are ALAC/RALO Leadership), 126 just ALAC-Announce and 98 just At-Large For mail sent to lists from senders not on the lists, there are four possible outcomes, it goes through, it is held for moderation, it bounces or it is discarded without a reject message (moderation requires staff action). Based on a test, I believe that for the ALAC list, such messages are discarded, for the ALAC-Internal list, such mail bounces, and for the ExCom it is moderated. Not sure about the two larger lists. My suggestions for going forward are: ALAC - Membership for ALAC, RALO Leadership, formal Liaisons appointed by the ALAC, Board member and Staff - Membership for Liaisons appointed TO the ALAC - Perhaps membership to WG Chairs if not already included above - Membership for past holders of above categories (my preference, or could be receive only - see below) ALAC-Internal - Membership for ALAC, RALO Leadership, formal Liaisons appointed by the ALAC, Board member and Staff ALAC-ExCom (with a new name mapping to the ALAC Leadership Team name used in the new RoP) - Members of the ExCom, formal Liaisons appointed by the ALAC, Board member and Staff I think we need to discuss the ALAC-Announce and At-Large lists further. I am not at all sure we need two lists for this. I suggest we create two additional lists that "shadow" the ALAC and ExCom lists. That is, subscription open to all and they receive all messages that got to the ALAC and ExCom lists. This allows those who want to follow the discussions to receive them without the inconvenience of having to go to the archive. This is equivalent to adding the to the lists in receive-only mode, but since we have had regular problems ensuring that the membership of the ALAC and ExCom lists is correct, having a shadow list would be a lot cleaner. Please let me know what you think about these issues. Alan

4 7

Reminder: At-Large Toronto Meeting Reports
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Nov. 2, 2012

Nov. 2, 2012

Please be so kind to find the Reporting Page for all of the meetings you attend at ICANN 45 in Toronto. https://community.icann.org/x/cRAQAg Please fill this table as you attend meetings which are not At-Large meetings. As mentioned at the end of the Sunday working session, it is *really* important that you fill these in order to provide a good overview of the matters discussed in other sessions for those who have not been able to attend. Many thanks, Olivier

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [At-Large] 2012-2013 ALAC Officers and Liaisons - Results of Elections and Appointments
by Alan Greenberg Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Congratulations to all, and yes, you will be seeing something from me related to succession shortly. Alan At 30/10/2012 05:03 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote: >Firstly please note my personal and heartfelt congratulations to this >returning ALAC Leadership Team (nee ExCom) and of course to my fellow ALAC >Liaisons for 2012-13 > >Secondly as you all know I intend to facilitate and support some 'in >training as assist/second' talent in my role as Liaison with the ccNSO to >hopefully provide ALAC with some great choices to replace me next year, and >I hope ALAC will support their other Liaisons (especially the bylaw >mandated ones) in doing the same... redundancy and support planning IS >important... > >Finally I can't help but note with Regional pride where the diversity in >these important roles is coming from => well done AP/Regional ladies... and >note that of course I'm the only RALO one, Rinalia is a NomCom appointment >to ALAC (as is Carlton and Alan) and Julie is Regional expertise based... >So this is way more than a gender diversity issue... something to be very >proud of in my view at least... >On Oct 31, 2012 6:39 AM, "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> >wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > We are pleased to announce the results of the calls for the 2012-2013 ALAC > > Officers and ALAC Liaisons: > > > > ALAC Officers making up the ALAC Executive Committee: > > > > ALAC Chair - Olivier Crépin-Leblond (Two year term: AGM 2012 - AGM 2014) > > ALAC Vice-Chair - Evan Leibovitch (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > ALAC Vice-Chair - Carlton Samuels (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > ALAC Rapporteur - Tijani Ben Jemaa (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > ALAC Regional Representative - Rinalia Abdul Rahim (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > > > For additional details, please see the ALAC Officer Election Schedule - > > 2012< > > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Officer+Election+Schedule+… > > > > > > > ALAC Liaisons: > > > > ccNSO Liaison - Cheryl Langdon-Orr (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > GNSO Liaison - Alan Greenberg (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > NCSG Liaison - Evan Leibovitch (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > SSAC Liaison - Julie Hammer (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > > > For additional details, please see the 2012-2013 ALAC Liaison Selection - > > Schedule and Nominees Workspace< > > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/2012-2013+ALAC+Liaison+Selectio… > > > > > > > All positions were elected or appointed by acclamation by the ALAC. > > > > Congratulations to the members of the ALAC Excom and the ALAC Liaisons! > > > > Regards, > > > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie > > Peregrine, and Julia Charvolen > > ICANN Policy Staff in support of the ALAC > > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > AFRI-Discuss mailing list > > AFRI-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/afri-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.afralo.org > > > > Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent to this > > list are more accurate: > > > http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#… > > >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: [council] Call for Volunteers: IGN-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group Members
by Alan Greenberg Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

FYI. Alan ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29oct12-en.htm>http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29oct12-en.htm > > >Call for Volunteers: IGN-INGO Protections Policy >Development Process (PDP) Working Group Members >Date: 29 October 2012 > > > > > >Introduction > > > >At its meeting on 17 October 2012, the GNSO >Council initiated a Policy Development Process >(PDP) on the Protection of Certain International >Organization Names in all GTLDs. (see ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/resolutions#20121017-2>20121017-2). >The GNSO Council decided at this meeting that a >group of volunteers should now be convened to >draft the charter for the IGO-INGO PDP Working >Group, which is to be approved by the GNSO Council. > > >Task of the Drafting Team > > > >The Drafting Team will be tasked with developing >a charter for the PDP Working Group on the >Protection of Certain International Organization >Names in all GTLDs. The Charter should include, >at a minimum, the following elements as >specified in the ><http://gnso.icann.org/council/summary-gnso-wg-guidelines-06apr11-en.pdf>GNSO >Working Group Guidelines: Working Group >identification; Mission, Purpose and >Deliverables; Formation, Staffing and >Organization, and; Rules of Engagement. The >proposed charter will be submitted to the GNSO >Council for its consideration. Upon completion >of the Charter by the Drafting Team, the Working >Group will then begin execution of the Charter. > > >Volunteers > > > >If you are interested to participate, please >send an email to the ><mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>GNSO >Secretariat. You will be required to complete a ><http://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/New+SOIs>Statement >of Interest in order to participate. It is >proposed that the group meet each Wednesday at 18:00 UTC for two hours. > > >Background Information on the Issue > > > >The ICANN Board has requested policy advice from >the GNSO Council and the GAC on whether special >protections should be afforded for the names and >acronyms of the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement >("RCRC"), the International Olympic Committee >("IOC") and/or International Government Organizations ("IGOs"). > >In September 2011, the GAC sent advice to the >GNSO with a proposal for granting second level >protections based upon the protections afforded >to IOC/RCRC at the first level during the >initial round of new gTLD applications, and that >such protections are permanent. As a result of >the GAC proposal submitted to the GNSO, the GNSO >IOC/RCRC Drafting Team was formed and created a >set of recommendations for protecting the >IOC/RCRC names at the second level of the >initial round new gTLDs, including the >initiation of an "expedited PDP" to determine >appropriate permanent protections for the RCRC and IOC names. > >The latest inquiry to examine the issue of >protecting IGO names emerged as a result of a >request from the ICANN Board in response to >letters received from the OECD and other IGOs in >December 2011. Specifically, IGOs are seeking >ICANN approval of protections at the top level >that, at a minimum, are similar to those >afforded to the RCRC and IOC in the Applicant >Guidebook. In addition, IGOs are seeking a >pre-emptive mechanism to protect their names at >the second level. On 11 March 2012, the ICANN >Board formally requested that the GNSO Council >and the GAC provide policy advice on the IGO's request. > >The Final Issue Report was submitted by ICANN >Staff on 1 October 2012 (see ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…>http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…) >and in this report a number of issues are >outlined that will need further consideration during the PDP. > >The GNSO Council approved the IGO-INGO PDP at its 17 October 2012 meeting. > > >Recommended Reading for Volunteers > > > > * > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…>Final > Issue Report on the Protection of IGO Names > * > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-08apr11-en.pdf>GNSO > Working Group Guidelines, including charter guidelines > > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org >

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Dear IDN WG and ALAC, Please find below the revised statement on the* "Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations" *that incorporates additions proposed during the Toronto meeting. Suggestions for further amendments *must be received by Friday (November 2nd)* for the ALAC to commence a vote in time to meet the Reply Period deadline on November 9th. Thanks. Rinalia Abdul Rahim* * ** * * * * *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years. We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users. We note with concern that the draft recommendations consider selected IDN ccTLD strings to be confusingly similar based on their appearance to “a reasonable Internet user who is unfamiliar with the script” although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration. Notwithstanding the merit and rationale for this assessment criterion, an assessment on confusing similarity based primarily on the appearance of selected strings to users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs, which are fundamentally introduced for the use and benefit of local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without taking into account sufficient linguistic factors, problematic results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by a user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN user and vice versa. We believe that this particular issue can be addressed in the policy making process through more consultations with the IDN communities in implicated ccTLD territories. Finally, we wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet. Towards this end, the attribution of IDNs should take into account the fact that some languages have a wide geographical distribution that go beyond national borders and are thus not the sole property of one sovereign state alone. It follows, therefore, that due consideration should be given to protecting the rights of concerned language communities which, though falling outside the jurisdiction of one nation state, share with its inhabitants a common language or script. END

1 0

Reminder: Meeting Reports from those who have attended ICANN in Toronto
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Oct. 29, 2012

Oct. 29, 2012

Hello all, the meeting report page of our ICANN Toronto week is at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Toronto+Meeting+Reports Congratulations and thanks to all who have filed one or more reports! However, I note that most people have not filed any report at all. This is very disappointing. If you have attended a session which does not have a report so far, please be so kind to write a short report, even a few lines, to let others know the issues discussed and the general topics of the meeting, along with the conclusion, if any. Many thanks, Olivier

4 3

Fwd: [new TLD Applicants & Advisors (nTLD A + A)] http://internetcommerce.org/USG_Review_DotCom_Renewal
by Holly Raiche Oct. 28, 2012

Oct. 28, 2012

HI Everyone For those not on Corwin's list, this is an interesting note - the review by the US Gov of IANA's contract with Verisign - that is taking its own sweet time! HOlly Begin forwarded message: > From: "Philip Corwin" <notification+zrdo=66e=lcz(a)facebookmail.com> > Date: 29 October 2012 9:22:45 AM AEDT > To: "new TLD Applicants & Advisors (nTLD A + A)" <283484908411146(a)groups.facebook.com> > Subject: [new TLD Applicants & Advisors (nTLD A + A)] http://internetcommerce.org/USG_Review_DotCom_Renewal > Reply-To: Reply to comment <g+416lfn0j000zg543zelp003k5cal6nyr000zg4db9t6126z46(a)groups.facebook.com> > > Philip Corwin posted in new TLD Applicants & Advisors (nTLD A + A) > > Philip Corwin 29 October 09:22 > http://internetcommerce.org/USG_Review_DotCom_Renewal > .Com Pricing Through 2018 Uncertain as USG Reviews Renewal Contract | Internet Commerce Associatio > internetcommerce.org > The voice of commerce and entrepreneurship in Internet Governance > > View Post on Facebook · Edit email settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.

1 0

Fwd: [community] ALAC > Letter Regarding Registry SG DIDT on TMCH
by Hong Xue Oct. 28, 2012

Oct. 28, 2012

I think John has made it very clear. "Those are patent applications, not patents. There is a large and important difference." Patents are all public. Hong ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Seth Reiss (Confluence) <no-reply(a)icann.org> Date: Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:28 AM Subject: [community] ALAC > Letter Regarding Registry SG DIDT on TMCH To: hongxueipr(a)gmail.com Seth Reiss <https://community.icann.org/display/~seth.reiss> added a comment to the page: *Letter Regarding Registry SG DIDT on TMCH* <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Letter+Regarding+Registry+SG+DI…> "subsistence or exercise" is not common IP legal language. I assume "subsidence" would mean that IP rights reside in certain material whether or not the rights are being exploited, and "exercise" would be the exploitation of the rights, but that is just a guess. Typically, pending patent applications are secret for 18 months from a first priority date. Copyrights could be confidential in unpublished material. Trademarks rights could never be secret. View Online<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Letter+Regarding+Registry+SG+DI…> · Like<https://community.icann.org/plugins/likes/like.action?contentId=37193719> · Reply To This<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Letter+Regarding+Registry+SG+DI…> Stop watching page<https://community.icann.org/users/removepagenotification.action?pageId=3719…> · Manage Notifications<https://community.icann.org/users/editmyemailsettings.action> This message was sent by Atlassian Confluence <http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence> 4.3.1, the Enterprise Wiki <http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/tour/enterprise-wiki.jsp> -- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China

1 0

Fwd: [council] Initiation of IGO/INGO Protection PDP
by Alan Greenberg Oct. 27, 2012

Oct. 27, 2012

FYI >From: Brian Peck <brian.peck(a)icann.org> >To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org>, "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" > <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> >CC: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam(a)icann.org>, Berry Cobb Mail > <mail(a)berrycobb.com>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> >Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:13:34 -0700 >Subject: [council] Initiation of IGO/INGO Protection PDP > >GNSO Council, > >As you recall from the 17 October 2012 Toronto meeting, the Council >adopted the motion to initiate a PDP to be completed in an expedited >manner on the Protections of Certain International Organization >Names in all gTLDs (see 20121017-2 ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/resolutions#20121017>http://gnso.icann.org/en/resolutions#20121017) >The GNSO Council decided at this meeting that a group of volunteers >should be convened quickly to draft the charter for the IGO-INGO >Protection PDP Working Group, which will likely include the members >from the IOC/RCRC Drafting Team. The first meeting of the IGO-INGO >Protection Charter Drafting Team is scheduled to occur on 31 October >2012 at 18:00 UTC. Calendar notices and request for volunteers will >be sent out shortly. > >To expedite initiation of the PDP, Staff developed the attached >first drafts of the IGO-INGO Protection WG Charter and proposed work >plan. The draft Charter proposes that the future WG create two >sub-groups (A & B) to address the different scope and timelines for >addressing the issues of special protections for the IOC/RCRC names >and IGO/INGO names separately. We'd like to request your particular >attention be given to the Mission & Scope, Objectives & Goals, and >Deliverables & Timeframes sections of the Charter. > >The draft proposed work plan is also provided to understand key >milestones of the PDP efforts and external events planned through >the first quarter of 2013. Please note that this is a working >draft. Staff is checking internally on the expert opinion issue, >and we'd like to propose updating this work plan once we receive >confirmation that we can obtain the expert opinion. > >Because the IOC/RCRC DT members will likely participate in the >IGO-INGO PDP, Staff suggests that the current IOC/RCRC DT be >suspended. It is expected that the remaining IOC/RCRC DT efforts, >after the close of the public comment period, will be addressed by >sub-group A of the PDP WG mentioned above. > >We look forward to meeting with members of the Drafting Team next >week. In the meantime, Staff would like to hear the Council's view >about this go-forward plan and will incorporate any feedback that >the Council has. > >Supporting Staff: Brian Peck, Margie Milam, Berry Cobb > > >Thank you. > >ICANN Policy Team > >

1 0