February 2013 - APAC-Discuss

DOODLE / APRALO December Monthly call
by At-Large Staff 26 Aug '13

26 Aug '13

Dear All, Due to our next APRALO call falling on 25 December 2012 (Christmas Day), please complete the attached Doodle poll to schedule this call a week before. http://doodle.com/bhe5m3arzuqkbeum This Doodle poll will close on Tuesday 11 December 2012 at 1500 UTC. The date and time will be announced shortly thereafter. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org One World, One Internet

12 36

NomCom updates
by Siranush Vardanyan 11 Apr '13

11 Apr '13

Dear APRALO colleagues, As I have mentioned during our last conference call, I will be sending you January Report card, which reflects the discussions, took place during NomCom January conference call. Please, see attached the report card. With this e-mail I also would like to remind you that there is open position for ALAC representative from Asia Pacific and Australia region, to serve for 2 years term as well as other positions, which can be applied by people from the region (attached I am sending you the leadership positions, which are currently open to apply). Please, think about applying by yourselves or recommend good candidates who can serve the best to the community. You can do your recommendations by sending the information directly to NomCom member/s or using the simple online recommendation process <http://nomcom.icann.org/suggest>. You can also advice us which regional event is important (besides those mentioned in the report card) for NomCom to do outreach activities prior to the deadline for submission, which is May 1st. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, related to NomCom activities. Thank you all for your support. Sincerely, SiranushICANN NomCom member from APRALO

1 3

WSIS +10 closing ceremony speech
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro 28 Feb '13

28 Feb '13

Dear All, Kindly find the WSIS +10 Closing Speech below: *Statement by Anita Gurumurthy, Executive Director, IT for Change<#13d200ba367e0146_sdfootnote1sym> * * * *at the closing ceremony of WSIS plus 10 review * * * *held by UNESCO from 25th to 27th February, 2013* Dear fellow-citizens of the world; On the occasion of this initial meeting in the WSIS+10 review process. I would like to take us back in time to the decade of the 90s and the particular sentiments at the turn of the millennium that framed the World Summit on the Information Society. In the late 90s, the power of the digital revolution was seen as heralding a new hope for addressing long standing challenges in development. At the same time, world leaders were also concerned that the digital divide at international and national levels could lead to shaping a new class of those who have access to ICTs and those who do not. As we stand at this milestone of the WSIS plus 10 review, we have the responsibility to go back to this concern. The Internet – as the future social paradigm – is already yet another axis shaping exclusion and power. The WSIS Declaration of Principles titled 'Building the Information Society: a global challenge in the new Millennium' avers in its preamble that no one should be excluded from the benefits the information society offers. It notes – with conviction interlaced with caution that - 'under favourable conditions', these technologies (that is, ICTs) can be a powerful instrument, increasing productivity, generating economic growth, job creation and employability and improving the quality of life of all. This is the moment of reckoning – for all of us – to ask if we stand at the threshold of a new positive future for all and if indeed, the global and national governance and policy architectures of the new techno-social paradigm have created the 'favourable conditions' for the good life that seemed plausible in 2003. - The economic crisis of the recent years, in the developed world, is a serious indictment of the macro economic pathways of neo-liberal growth and its policies. Recent research in Europe suggests that serious attention needs to be paid to the inequality in work - wages, working conditions and social cohesion - and its microeconomic implications. - Even in Latin America, despite relative economic stability and reduction in poverty in many countries, a recent research by the UN says that the richest 20% of the population on average earn 20 times more than the poorest 20%. There is a considerable job deficit and a large labour informality affecting mainly the young and women. Colombia, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, Argentina and Guatemala have all seen an increase in inequality in the past decade. - The Asian giants China and India, often touted as rising economic powers, face huge challenges in socio-economic equity – the consuming middle class may but be a smokescreen that hides the livelihoods crisis for the majority. All this has happened in the same decade that the Internet ought to have been been equalising social and economic opportunity. We need to sit back and reflect,what went wrong?Why did the Internet, and the Information Society phenomenon not do what it was supposed to do? This is the principal question that the WSIS review process must answer. If the good life is also about democratic transitions, then the miracles of technology may certainly be counted as harbingers of deep change in the past decade. Authoritarian states have had to come to terms with the power of interconnection in the network age. The Occupy Movement gave new hope to social movements. Yet, new configurations of power in mainstream spaces have more or less seen the political elite make way for a new class of economic elite – information society democracy remains as exclusionary as its predecessors. Perhaps more, with little place for women and others in the margins, and oblivious of new forms of violence and misogyny in the open and ostensibly emancipatory corridors of the virtual world. Those of us committed to build a people-centred, inclusive and development oriented information society have to come to terms with and interrogate the roots of these crises – the unfavourable conditions that seem to have jettisoned the equalising propensities of the Internet. The crisis today for the information society agenda is two fold – it is economic and it is cultural. The neo-liberal juggernaut has – at an unstoppable speed – usurped the power of connectedness. As some cyber enthusiasts continue to sing peons to the power of the supposedly decentralised, non-hierarchical and inclusive Net, the human predicament in real terms is far from this idealised picture. Today, a handful of colossal corporate mega-giants rule private empires - the top 10 Web sites accounted for 31 percent of US page views in 2001, 40 percent in 2006, and about 75 percent in 2010...” Centralization is the name of the game – the most powerful weapon in neo-liberalism's arsenal. Consider Google: when it comes to user data, today Google runs a much more centralized operation than five years ago where individual searches, youtube video histories, and calendars combine to generate individualised and targeted ads. The Internet market place atomises the consumer-user, coopting her persona as a commodity in a logic that may not be self evident to Internet enthusiasts unwilling to see the realpolitik. The cultural crisis is deeper. What the architects of the WSIS documents perhaps underestimated is the way the information society would precipitate a normative crisis. As the Internet market place broadens its horizons, we see the individuals, communities and nations, fragmented by increasing self interest. The seamless geographies of the connected world are images of the Internet's economic paradigm – where membership for marginalised individuals, social groups and nations is a simple binary - assimilation or decimation. The talk of diversity and multiligualism notwithstanding, there is much less we can aspire today out of the promise of the networks society for collaboration and horizontalism than seemed plausible ten years ago. We need to pause and ask – are our normative frameworks – infoethics and info-civic imaginaries – adequate to ensure that every person, the last woman, can be a global citizen in the interconnected global world. What we are witness to instead of a reflection around the basics of democracy in the interconnected world, are anxieties of nations states that make ancient tribal chieftans seem like impeccable upholders of freedoms and the rule of law The various international summits of the UN, Rio-Earth Summit in 1992 , Cairo in 1994 on population, Copenhagen in 1995 on social development, Beijing in 1996 for women – pursued problems confronting humanity with the resolve to find progressive solutions. Today these have contributed to the broadbasing and democratisation of civil society engagement. There are some lessons here for civil society in the information society space. Also, as we move towards the WSIS + 10 review, we need to be cognizant of the competing demands of the Millennium Development Goals Review (Post 2015 Development Agenda), the processes to set the post-Rio+20 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the 20-year review of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD+20). These overlapping inter-governmental processes are bound to render the ideals of the WSIS declaration obscure unless we are able to pitch for a review that can offer analytical and pragmatic segways for the other UN reviews. The WSIS plus 10 review is a historic opportunity therefore to review the state of democracy – and I qualify, the state of global democracy. Here – we have two tasks 1. Re-interpreting human rights, equality and sustainability in the information society. This is a dialogue that must inform the other UN reviews and discussions on the crises of food, fuel, finance and climate change, poverty and deprivation, inequality and insecurity, and violence against women. 1. The second task is to explore the favourable conditions that can make the Internet an equaliser. As a global public good, the policy issues pertaining to the Internet are simultaneously global and national. Discussing the global policy issues around the Internet should be a principal aim of the WSIS plus 10 review process. We stand at cross-roads. The promise of community has never been greater in theory, but the risk to the collective never higher in the brazen pursuit of economic self interest and aggrandizement of power. For civil society the modus operandi of organising is clear. We need to ask how best we can sieze and use the decentralising possibilities of the network age to craft new forms of organisation; how we can define the core issues that reflect honestly our analysis of the crises. The WSIS plus 10 review process must indeed take a leaf out of Jo Freeman's essay - 'The tyranny of structurelessness'. Let not the ideals of democracy in multistakeholderism be reduced to shadowboxing – where emerging hierarchies are denied and those that wield power escape with no accountability. Multistakeholderism is a framework and means of engagement, it is not a means of legitimization. Legitimization comes from people, from work with and among people. We need to use this occasion of the WSIS plus 10 review to go back to the the touchstone of legitimacy – engage with people and communities to find out the conditions of their material reality and what seems to lie ahead in the information society. From here we need to build our perspectives and then come to multistakeholder spaces and fight and fight hard for those who cannot be present here. <http://Www.ITforChange.net/> -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

1 0

Fwd: [ALAC] Closed generic statement
by Holly Raiche 28 Feb '13

28 Feb '13

Hi Everyone This is another and later step on the issue of gTLDs. So please, go to the wiki to read the latest version. https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40927847 Let me know if you are okay with the new and more nuanced version Holly Begin forwarded message: > From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> > Date: 28 February 2013 5:00:24 PM AEDT > To: ALAC Working List <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: [ALAC] Closed generic statement > > At Tuesday's ALAC meeting, Evan presented a statement on closed > generic word domains that gave the two opposing positions that had > been expressed by various ALAC and At-Large people. I suggested that > the ALAC not vote for or against that statement, but each member say > with side they supported. As the discussion evolved, there was some > discomfort about simply giving a tally of the two sides, and > moreover, that it ignored a third option that allowed some parts of > both sides to be supported. I volunteered to work with Evan to create > a new version. > > I did create such a 3rd "in between" option. As we were reviewing it, > and partially guided by a message from Roberto Gaetano, Evan > suggested that this in-between option, with some enhancements, could > be a single statement that most or all of the ALAC could support. > > What you see here is an evolution of that statement. Thanks to > Olivier and Rinalia who identified a number of problems with earlier versions. > > The comment period closes on March 7th, so a vote will need to be > completed by March 6th. I believe that Olivier would like to start a > vote relatively quickly, so if you have any problems with what you > see here, please speak up quickly. > > This new statement is also posted on the wiki - > https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg. > > Alan > > ================================= > > On the whole, the ALAC does not believe that closed generics provide > public benefit and would prefer that TLDs -- especially for strings > representing categories -- were not allocated in a way that would > lock out broad access to sub-domains. Some members of At-Large > believe, on principle, that all closed generics are harmful to the > public good. Others believe that, while not necessarily being > beneficial to end users, closed gTLDs should be allowed as simply > being consistent with existing practise for lower-level domains. > > However, in developing this response to the Board's request, the ALAC > found the issue to be far more nuanced than the above hard positions > would suggest. We can foresee innovative business models that might > allow a closed TLD to be in the public interest. An example might be > a registry that makes 2nd level names available at no cost to anyone, > but retains legal control over them. This is similar to the model > used by Facebook and many blog hosting sites. Allowance should be > made for applicants interested in widespread sub-domain distribution > that do not require domain-name sales as a source of revenue, or for > other forms of sub-domain allocation. > > Whether a generic-word string is used with its generic meaning or in > some other context may also be relevant. The fictitious but famous > computer manufacturer, Orange Computers Inc. using the TLD ".orange" > might be acceptable, while the same string used as a closed TLD by a > California Orange Growers Cooperative (and not allowing access to > orange producers from Florida or Mediterranean and South American > countries) might well be considered unacceptable. > > Allowing this nuanced approach would likely involve a case by case > review of how a TLD will be used and how its sub-domains will be > allocated. Moreover, it would require a contractual commitment to not > change that model once the TLD is delegated. > > In summary, the ALAC believes that completely uncontrolled use of > generic words as TLDs is not something that ICANN should be > supporting. However, some instances of generic word TLDs could be > both reasonable and have very strong benefits of just the sort that > ICANN was seeking when the TLD space was opened. Such uses should not > be excluded. > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

1 0

Fwd: [Secretariat] IMPORTANT Meeting Invitation - RALO discussion on ALAC Objection Process to new gTLD applications
by Holly Raiche 27 Feb '13

27 Feb '13

Hi Everyone This is just a reminder to please, have a look and either post directly to the website or get back to me Holly Begin forwarded message: > From: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> > Date: 27 February 2013 11:27:01 PM AEDT > To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin(a)ttcsweb.org>, New gTLD Review Group <newgtldrg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "secretariat(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <secretariat(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: [Secretariat] IMPORTANT Meeting Invitation - RALO discussion on ALAC Objection Process to new gTLD applications > > Dear All, > > Please take note of the email below from Dev Anand Teelucksingh, Chair of > the New gTLD Review Group > > A conference call for RALO officers to ask questions as to what is expected > by the RALOs as per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new gTLD > application is scheduled on Thursday 28 February 2013 at 2100 UTC > > For other times: > http://tinyurl.com/co2vlp8 > > The draft agenda (TO BE UPDATED) and call details are available at: > https://community.icann.org/x/-41wAg > > Adobe Connect: > http://icann.adobeconnect.com/atlarge-newgtldrg/ > > Wiki workspace: > https://community.icann.org/x/u7-bAQ > > French and Spanish interpretation will be provided subject to sufficient > demand. > > If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff > at:staff@atlarge.icann.org. > > Thank you. > Regards, > > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie > Peregrine and Julia Charvolen > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > One World, One Internet > > On 26/02/2013 08:45, "Dev Anand Teelucksingh" <admin(a)ttcsweb.org> wrote: > >> As per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new gTLD >> application, (see PDF at >> http://bit.ly/how-ALAC-files-objection-to-new-gTLD ), the new gTLD >> Review Group (gTLD RG) have posted objection statements on community >> grounds to 5 new gTLD applications for Regional At-Large Organisation >> (RALO) review and advice to the ALAC. >> >> The gTLD RG drafted the statements based on the outcomes of its review >> and discussion of comments received by February 8 2013 (see >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/2013q1/009493.html) >> >> All of the objection statements are on community objection grounds. >> The community objection grounds page at >> https://community.icann.org/x/QgkQAg lists four tests that would >> enable the Dispute Resolution Service Provider hearing the objection >> to determine whether there is substantial opposition from a >> significant portion of the community to which the string may be >> targeted. Note also that all four tests must be met for the objection >> to prevail. >> >> The 5 applications and objection statements, including the comments >> received by the gTLD RG on the applications are listed at the wiki >> page at https://community.icann.org/x/soxwAg >> >> All RALOs must review EACH of the 5 gTLD applications and the >> associated information (objection statement, comments) on the wiki >> pages and decide if the objection statement drafted by the gTLD RG >> group supports the criterion for community objection. >> >> The RALO cannot modify any of the 5 objection statements, but must >> advise the ALAC as to whether the RALO EITHER: >> 1) supports the the objection statement being filed by the ALAC >> against the new gTLD application OR >> 2) NOT support the objection statement being filed by the ALAC against >> the new gTLD application. >> >> This advice for each of the 5 objection statements must be sent to the >> ALAC by March 5 2013, 23:59 UTC so that the ALAC can review the RALO >> advice before the end of the objection period on March 13 2013. >> >> A conference call is tentatively scheduled on Thursday February 28 >> 2013 (exact time will be confirmed by At-Large Staff) is being planned >> for RALO officers if they have questions as to what is expected by >> the RALOs as per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new >> gTLD application. At-Large members are welcome to attend this call. >> _______________________________________________ >> Newgtldrg mailing list >> Newgtldrg(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/newgtldrg >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Secretariat mailing list > Secretariat(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/secretariat > > Secretariat wiki at: http://st.icann.org/secretariat

1 0

CALL FOR COMMENTS: At-Large Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs Workspace
by ICANN At-Large Staff 27 Feb '13

27 Feb '13

Dear All, Please note that the At-Large Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/34twAg> has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to collected the At-Large's Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 15-March-2013 at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

IMPORTANT: At-Large Objection Statements posted for RALO review - deadline for RALO advice to ALAC is March 5 2013
by ICANN At-Large Staff 26 Feb '13

26 Feb '13

Dear All, Please see an important message being sent on behalf of Dev Anand Teelucksingh, Chair of the At-Large new gTLD Review Group: ** Dear All, As per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new gTLD application, (see one page PDF at http://bit.ly/how-ALAC-files-objection-to-new-gTLD ), the new gTLD Review Group (gTLD RG) have posted objection statements on community grounds to 5 new gTLD applications for Regional At-Large Organisation (RALO) review and advice to the ALAC. The gTLD RG drafted the statements based on the outcomes of its review and discussion of comments received by February 8, 2013 (see http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/2013q1/009493.html) All of the objection statements are on community objection grounds. The community objection grounds page at https://community.icann.org/x/QgkQAg lists four tests that would enable the Dispute Resolution Service Provider hearing the objection to determine whether there is substantial opposition from a significant portion of the community to which the string may be targeted. Note also that ALL four tests must be met for the objection to prevail. The 5 applications and objection statements, including the comments received by the gTLD RG on the applications can be found on the workspace at https://community.icann.org/x/soxwAg with 5 separate wiki pages for each new gTLD application, the objection statement and the comments received by the gTLD RG. Members of At-Large are invited to discuss and post questions or comments on these wiki pages. All RALOs must review EACH of the 5 gTLD applications and the associated information (objection statement, comments) on the wiki pages and decide if the objection statement drafted by the gTLD RG group supports the criterion for community objection. The RALO cannot modify any of the 5 objection statements, but must advise the ALAC as to whether the RALO EITHER: 1) supports the objection statement being filed by the ALAC against the new gTLD application OR 2) NOT support the objection statement being filed by the ALAC against the new gTLD application. This advice for each of the 5 objection statements must be sent to the ALAC by March 5, 2013, 23:59 UTC so that the ALAC can review the RALO advice before the end of the objection period on March 13, 2013. A conference call is tentatively scheduled on Thursday, February 28, 2013 (exact time will be confirmed by At-Large Staff) is being planned for RALO officers with the gTLD RG members to provide an overview of the process and to answer any questions they may have as to what is expected by the RALOs as per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new gTLD application. At-Large members are welcome to attend this call. Kind regards, Dev Anand Teelucksingh ** 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>

3 2

REMINDER: Call for Membership of New ICANN Meeting Strategy Working Group - DEADLINE: 3 March
by ICANN At-Large Staff 26 Feb '13

26 Feb '13

Dear All, As announced<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-11feb13-en.htm> on 11 February, ICANN has committed to identifying ICANN Meeting locations two years in advance. After consideration that adoption of a prior Consolidated Meetings Strategy proposal was not timely, the Public Participation Committee (PPC) initiated work to create a working group to address the meeting location strategy which was presented to the ICANN Board for approval in February 2013. In line with the Board resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-02feb13-en.htm#2…> adopted on February the 2nd 2013, ICANN is creating a new Meeting Strategy Working Group<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg> (MSWG) and now invites interested individuals to apply for Volunteer Member positions - in representation of a Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee - to serve on the Meeting Strategy Working Group. The mandate and Mission of Meeting Strategy Working Group as defined in the MSWG Charter is as follows: to discuss and propose strategy for the structure, purpose and locations for ICANN Public Meetings and conferences, starting in 2015. Deadline Candidatures will be accepted until Sunday, 3 March 2013 - 23:59 UTC. How to Apply How to Apply for the Position of Volunteer Member for the MSWG Interested individuals are invited to provide the following: * A resume (maximum three pages); * A letter of motivation; * A Declaration of Interests (the template may be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/coi-declaration-aff… [PDF, 34 KB]) * The Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee he/she wishes to represent; * Any additional information the Support Organization or Advisory Committee may require to reach its decision on endorsement. Candidatures will be forwarded to the Supporting Organization (SO) or Advisory Committee (AC) identified by the applicant, for endorsement. SO/AC endorsement will be factored into the selection process; Candidatures should be emailed to mswgcandidatures(a)icann.org<mailto:mswgcandidatures@icann.org> (please cc to staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>) The list of all candidates will be published on the ICANN website. More information * Call for Applicants<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/call-for-volunteers…> * Charter<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/charter> 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>

2 1

Pre-Beijing ICANN Policy Update Webinar Invitation
by At-Large Staff 25 Feb '13

25 Feb '13

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-21feb13-en.htm Pre-Beijing ICANN Policy Update Webinar Invitation In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org) to receive the call details. Whether you plan to participate in the upcoming ICANN meeting in Beijing remotely or in person, you're invited to an update on the background and current status of major policy issues which are likely to be discussed during the Beijing Meeting. The ICANN Policy Staff will provide a briefing on Thursday 21 March at 12.00 UTC and Thursday 21 March at 19.00 UTC, summarizing policy issues across the different ICANN Supporting Organizations, namely the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) and Address Supporting Organization (ASO). Amongst other topics, updates will be provided on: * WHOIS related activities * The locking of a domain name subject to UDRP Proceedings * Protection of IGO and INGO Names * IDN ccNSO PDP * Study Group on Use of Names for Countries and Territories * SSAC report on Domain Name Registration Data Validation Taxonomy The webinar will cover other topics which will be raised during or otherwise relevant to the Beijing Meeting. In addition, staff will provide a briefing on the ALAC's activities related to current policy development issues of the Supporting Organizations. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for 90 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org. In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, Thursday at 12.00 UTC or Thursday at 19.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html). We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. -- Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org One World, One Internet

1 0

Meeting Invitation / At-Large WHOIS Briefing Call
by At-Large Staff 19 Feb '13

19 Feb '13

Dear All, On behalf of Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, and Carlton Samuels, Chair of the At-Large WHOIS Working Group, you are invited to participate in an At-Large briefing call on the subject of WHOIS scheduled for Wednesday 20 February 2013 between 15:00 - 16:30 UTC. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/c9oc9n2 The agenda and call details are available at: https://community.icann.org/x/koZwAg Adobe Connect Meeting Room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/atlargewhois/ <http://icann.adobeconnect.com/atlargewhois/> During this WHOIS briefing call, Carlton will first provide an introduction to WHOIS and frame the issue in the context of At-Large. Jim Galvin, SSAC Vice-Chair, will comment on WHOIS as it concerns security and integrity of the Internet. Thereafter, members of the At-Large community and the broader ICANN community will present their various views of WHOIS. Confirmed speakers include: Garth Bruen, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Avri Doria, Alan Greenberg, Evan Leibovitch, Michele Neylon and Holly Raiche. There will be a Question and Answer session following the speakers. Spanish and French interpretation will be provided for this briefing call. We look forward to your participation. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org One World, One Internet

1 2