- ALAC - lists.icann.org

NOW ONLINE: Summary Minutes ALAC 22 Feb Call
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 25, 2011

Feb. 25, 2011

Dear All, The summary minutes, action items and audio recordings of the recent ALAC teleconference are now linked to: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+22.02.11+-+Monthly+Teleconf erence -- Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, Kristina Nordström ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org website: www.atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: RE: GAC Scoresheet follow-up
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 24, 2011

Feb. 24, 2011

Dear all, for those reading the GAC scoresheet from http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23feb11-en.htm you might have noticed: >2. Rights Protection: Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS): >GAC Advice: >* Significantly reduce the timescales. See attached table for proposed changes. This table was missing from the document. After enquiring about it, please find it attached to this message. Warm regards, Olivier

1 0

Proposed integrated JAS charter.
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 24, 2011

Feb. 24, 2011

I am sending this message at the request of Olivier. Please find attached my proposed revised charter for adoption by the ALAC. It has already been reviewed by the ExCom. I have included the original ALAC charter, the GNSO charter, the revised ALAC charter and a Rationale/Notes in a side-by-side format. - It preserves all of the important aspects of the ALAC charter. - It includes the aspects of the GNSO Charter in well delineated manner (the sections applying to the GNSO could be reordered to be consecutive, but I have not done that, don't really think that it is necessary, and feel that it may confuse the overall mission of the WG. - It will allow the WG to easily segregate the parts of its report that are targeted at the GNSO from those parts targeted at both the GNSO and ALAC. Moreover, it will allow a single report to go to the Board. There are two substantive content changes. - The section on investigating the $100k component of the fee has been removed. This was done at Cheryl's suggestion, but with the strong support of me and Olivier. I will let her present the rationale. - Avri had earlier suggested that the section on fund-raising and a possible foundation should be revised. I have included a new version from her. In the table, both the old and the new are presented for your review, and in the consolidated "clean" version, only the new. I have also included a single clean version of the proposed charter at the end of the document. Alan

2 1

GAC Scorecard released
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 23, 2011

Feb. 23, 2011

Makes really interesting reading. http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23feb11-en.htm Alan

1 0

US Department of Commerce iterates some of its positions in Keynote Remarks by Lawrence E. Strickling
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 23, 2011

Feb. 23, 2011

Hello everyone, In yesterday's ALAC Executive Committee Conference Call, I alluded to a document from NTIA describing some of the position which they are likely to bring to Brussels. This document can be found on: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2011/siliconflatirons_02142011.html It contains some insight to what the US DoC has brought to the GAC scorecards, and ultuimately what values it will defend. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Serendipity: New gTLDs: Briefing Papers for ICANN Board-GAC Consultations
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 22, 2011

Feb. 22, 2011

Sébastien has very kindly informed us that the following announcement has been made by ICANN: New gTLDS: Briefing Papers for ICANN Board-GAC Consultations http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-6-21feb11-en.htm Extract from the Web page: --- cut here --- The briefing papers are as follows: *Objection Procedures*: includes requirements for governments to pay fees; procedures for review of sensitive strings; and early warning to applications---whether a proposed string would be considered controversial or to raise sensitivities (including geographical names) [PDF, 362 KB] *Root Zone Scaling* (to be provided) *Market and Economic Impacts* [PDF, 312 KB] *Registry-Registrar Separation* [PDF, 321 KB] *Protection of Rights Owners* (trademark protections) [PDF, 273 KB] *Consumer Protection Issues* (malicious conduct) [PDF, 259 KB] *Law Enforcement Due Diligence Recommendations* [PDF, 141 KB] *Post Delegation Disputes* with governments [PDF, 250 KB] *Geographic Names*: use and protection of geographical names [PDF, 370 KB] *Legal Recourse for Applicants* [PDF, 170 KB] *Providing Opportunities for all Stakeholders* [PDF, 256 KB] The Agenda for the meeting is still being finalized. --- cut here --- For the record, I am *surprised* that we have not been advised of this forthcoming set of documents and not been sent such details by email. It takes serendipity to find out about this information. Thank goodness luck is on our side. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Submission of WT A's proposed ICANN Bylaw revisions to ALAC Chair & ALAC
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 21, 2011

Feb. 21, 2011

Dear ALAC members: At-Large Improvements Work Team A has asked the At-Large staff to submit the WT’s (a) proposed ICANN Bylaw revisions and (b) proposed related timetable to me, as ALAC Chair. It further requests that I forward both to the full ALAC for its feedback, hence this message to you. The two items for review can be found at the following links (on the WT A Workspace): * WT A’s Proposed ICANN Bylaw Changes -- For ALAC Approval <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/WT+A%27s+Proposed+ICANN+Bylaw+C…>; and * WT A’s Proposed Timetable Regarding ICANN Bylaw Changes – For ALAC Approval <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/WT+A%27s+Proposed+Timetable+Reg…> In addition, the proposed Bylaw revisions, in the form of a red-line markup, can be found at this link (also on the WT A Workspace): Red-Line of Bylaw Revisions by WT A <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2951125/Red-Line+of+Bylaw+…>. Please be so kind to note that: * WT A collaborated closely with ICANN Legal – in particular, with Samantha Eisner – in the drafting of these proposed Bylaw revisions and the related timetable; both have the full support of WT A and of ICANN Legal. * The revisions and timetable satisfy all requirements and recommendations within the Final Report of the ALAC Review Working Group on ALAC Improvements <http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf> (9 June 2009). The specific goal of the revisions is to clarify the ALAC’s and At-Large’s continuing purpose as the primary home within ICANN of the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user. The details of this continuing purpose can be found in WT A’s Simplified Improvements Outline <https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AhOqmBdY590QdHR3Tm92N2JLNzlDN1Zva2…>. Once your feedback has been incorporated and its go-ahead given, the next step will be to send the proposed revisions to the SIC. The SIC will then consider recommending that the Board commence the required public comment period. (For that reason, a formal ALAC endorsement of the text is not necessary at this stage.) *Please be so kind to give your feedback by the end of Friday, 18 February, 2011. * On the pages of both the proposed revisions and timetable are sections for ALAC members’ comments. Please fill them accordingly. Warm regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair

3 2

Comments required: ALAC Statement on GNSO Working Group Guidelines
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 16, 2011

Feb. 16, 2011

Dear ALAC members, Due to our attention being focussed elsewhere, the comment period for the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, closed on 8 February 2011 without the ALAC filing a comment. However, the ALAC is also able to submit comments directly to the GNSO council. This needs to be done by 16 February 2011, as all documents for consideration need to be submitted 8 days in advance of the Council Meeting on February 24th. Several At-Large members contributed to the drafting of these guidelines, so there has already been much input from At-Large, but those members of At-Large who were involved in the working group drafting the guidelines did not comment for obvious reasons. Evan Leibovitch and I drafted some suggested text for the ALAC statement on GNSO WG Guidelines and shared it with the ALAC Executive Committee a few hours ago. This short statement follows, for your immediate review: --- cut here --- The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, as approved by the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC). The ALAC supports the recommendations included in this document, especially those for a Working Group Model, since this Model has the potential to enhance the policy development process by making it more inclusive and representative. We believe that thanks to this new model, the whole policy development process will be more effective and efficient. Specifically, we recommend that the GNSO involves active representation from other constituencies -- and in particular ICANN's standing Advisory Committees -- in policy development Working Groups, from the beginning. Such early involvement ensures widespread community investment in the policy process, especially from stakeholder representative groups that are strategically mandated by ICANN bylaws to be involved in policy. Early community participation in policy issues avoids the need to resort to corrective measures that are never as effective as "doing it right the first time". Such corrective measures, a number of which have proliferated to address deficiencies in the existing policy process, exact a significant cost in time delay, human resources, and monetary expense by both ICANN and third parties. --- cut here --- Please send any comments that you may have to the ALAC working list, by 16 Feb at 23:39 UTC. Warmest regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

2 2

ISOC statement on ACTA
by Wolf Ludwig Feb. 16, 2011

Feb. 16, 2011

Dear all, as some of you may have realised already, I am deeply concerned about the on-going process of the ACTA negotiations (ACTA stands for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). In this context, I got to know the ISOC statement “Calling for an open and international dialogue …”. In the statement, ISOC refers to / “…wishes to take this opportunity to provide our preliminary perspective on those parts of the proposed agreement which pertain to the Internet, Internet governance, Internet technologies, Internet intermediaries and/or Internet users.” What is our concern as well. I would like to share (with all those who haven’t seen the statement already) this with you. Full text see: http://www.isoc.org/internet/issues/docs/acta-ustr_20110214.pdf Kind regards, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig www.comunica-ch.net Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch - EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org

3 4

At-Large improvements update and call for more participants
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 12, 2011

Feb. 12, 2011

Dear ALAC members, Our ALAC/At-Large Improvements project has entered its final and most important phase, which will be one of our focuses in San Francisco. For that reason, I'd appreciate any of you not familiar with the Improvements work to please review the progress made. A good place to start is the summary update below. Primarily, I direct this request to our new ALAC members as well as Regional Leaders. Secondly, this is our last opportunity to add new members to the Improvements work teams. Any of you who would like, please volunteer for one or more of these teams. Again, while all are welcome, I particularly direct this request to our new members. The WTs have had, I'm pleased to report, the benefit of strong regional representation from the start. The co-chairs have, however, requested -- quite reasonably -- that anyone now volunteering for a WT be sure to familiarize him- or herself with its work thus far. This will ensure that any new member is truly an asset as the team begins the finalization of its work. Also, please feel free to discuss with the co-chairs which of the four WTs could most use help at this point. The teams' different areas of focus are described below. Kind regards, Olivier --- cut here --- *ALAC/At-Large Improvements Implementation Project: Update* /8 February 2011/// * * The current ALAC/At-Large Improvements project is now entering its most important stage. A brief history of the project: * The ALAC/At-Large Improvements project grew out of a 2008 ALAC/At-Large review, mandated by the ICANN Bylaws and conducted by an independent consultant. The review findings are summarized in a 25 July 2008 report (Independent Review of the At-Large Advisory Committee: Report to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers <http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-13aug08-en.htm>). * Using these findings and the input from two public comment periods, a BGC-appointed working group -- the Review Working Group on ALAC Improvements -- produced 13 recommendations (contained in the Final Report of the ALAC Review Working Group on ALAC Improvements <http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf>, 9 June 2009). These broad recommendations describe key improvements prescribed for the ALAC and At-Large, focusing on the groups' organization, effectiveness, participation, and relationship to other ICANN entities. The recommendations are described on the project's main Confluence page, the At-Large Improvements Workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Workspace> and, as a practical matter, have been divided into manageable tasks listed in theSimplified At-Large Improvements Implementation Outline <https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?hl=en&key=tLWfIP-TYeKgrmqH6AW-Q9g&authk…>. Of the 13 recommendations, Recommendation 2 -- the need for an At-Large-selected ICANN Board member -- was separated out for completion by the At-Large ABSdt and BCEC. Its implementation resulted in ICANN's first Director selected by At-Large being seated during the recent Cartagena Meeting. More recently, the remaining 12 recommendations were grouped by topic and divided among four At-Large Improvements work teams. A summary of each team's topic, assigned recommendations, and meeting schedule follows: * *WT A on ALAC's continuing purpose * Meets every other Thursday at 18:00 UTC Rec 1: ICANN Bylaws to reflect ALAC's continuing purpose Rec 2: ICANN Bylaw changed related to At-Large-selected Director Rec 10: ALAC/At-Large is home of individual Internet users Rec 11: Board statement recognizing Rec 10 * *WT B on ALS participation * Meets every other Wednesday at 13:00 UTC Rec 3: Remove any obstacles in ALS-RALO-ALAC structure Rec 4: ALS education and engagement Rec 7: ALAC should choose its own communication/collaboration tools Rec 9: ICANN should strengthen its translation/interpretation tools * *WT C on ALAC planning processes * Meets every other Wednesday at 19:00 UTC Rec 5: ALAC should develop strategic/operational plans as part of ICANN's planning process Rec 6: At-Large should develop accurate cost models * *WT D on ALAC's policy advice processes * Meets every other Thursday at 19:00 UTC Rec 8: ALAC may request public comment period be extended to 45 days Rec 12: Consumer representatives should have input into decisions and policy advice Rec 13: ALAC/At-Large policy advice mechanisms should be strengthened Each Improvements WT began meeting in September 2010. Each includes representatives from At-Large's five regions. And the calls of each occur every other week for one hour in English. The tentative deadline imposed by the ALAC for the completion of each WT's mandate is the end of March 2011. While all of the WTs are now entering the final and perhaps most important phase of their work, each obviously has different tasks ahead of it. Other tasks, of course, will be similar for all of the teams; these include: * Refining the improvements under discussion; * Determining the practical steps needed to implement these improvements; * Turning their improvement plans into ALAC proposals; and * Presenting their proposals to the At-Large Community and ALAC for feedback during ICANN's San Francisco Meeting. For further details on the ALAC/At-Large Improvements project or any of the WTs, please see these additional resources: * The main workspace of each WT, which includes member/co-chair lists, meeting minutes, and WT-created documents: o Main WT A Workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Work+Team…>; o Main WT B Workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Work+Team…>; o Main WT C Workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Work+Team…>; and o Main WT D Workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Work+Team…>. * Status of ALAC Improvements Implementation (9 March 2010; Nairobi) <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2950348/Status+of+ALAC+Imp…>, including a detailed history of the project; * ALAC-At-Large Improvements Implementation Project Plan (7 June 2010)<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2950348/ALAC-At-Large+Impr…>; and * ALAC/At-Large Improvements Implementation: Update (5 Dec 2010, Cartagena) <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/2950348/ALAC%2C+At-Large+I…>. Also, please feel free to contact the WT co-chairs (see the WT workspaces above) or the At-Large Improvements Project Manager, Seth Greene, at seth.greene(a)icann.org <mailto:seth.greene@icann.org>. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

5 5