October 2009 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

Local times for remote participation
by BC Secretariat Oct. 21, 2009

Oct. 21, 2009

Please find below the local times for the meetings in Seoul on Tuesday 27 October 2009. Gary CSG Meeting, 10.30 - 12.30 Seoul California 18.30 - 20.30 Alberta 19.30 - 21.30 DC/NY/Ottawa 21.30 - 23.30 London 01.30 - 03.30 Paris/Brussels/Malaga 02.30 - 04.30 BC Meeting, 14.00 - 16.30 Seoul California 22.00 - 00.30 Alberta 23.00 - 01.30 DC/NY/Ottawa 01.00 - 03.30 London 05.00 - 07.30 Paris/Brussels/Malaga 06.00 - 08.30

1 0

Remote participation, CSG meeting, Seoul
by BC Secretariat Oct. 21, 2009

Oct. 21, 2009

Dear Members I now have the dial-in details for the Commercial Stakeholders Group meeting in Seoul. Please contact me if you would like the details. I will compile a list of local time zones for both the CSG and BC meetings. Best wishes Gary

1 0

Re: Who will be in Seoul?
by BC Secretariat Oct. 21, 2009

Oct. 21, 2009

Dear Marilyn The latest list of BC members in Seoul is posted here http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00554.html with the addition of Chuck Warren. Gary

2 1

GNSO-related meetings, Seoul
by BC Secretariat Oct. 21, 2009

Oct. 21, 2009

Dear Members Please find attached the GNSO-related meeting schedule in Seoul. Best wishes Gary

1 0

CBUC Position Statement to PEDNR Working Group
by Berry Cobb Oct. 20, 2009

Oct. 20, 2009

CBUC, Attached is the DRAFT Position Statement for CBUC relative to the Post Expiration Domain Name Recovery Working Group. (PEDNR-WG). All comments and suggestions are welcome. With the PEDNR being a Pre-PDP, it is my understanding a formal vote by the CBUC will not occur on this position statement. Rather, it will be reserved for a final CBUC Position statement based on PEDNR outcomes and recommendations. Please advise if you have questions or comments. I will be sure to incorporate all comments and changes to this statement. It is my desire to have this statement returned to the PEDNR - WG by COB 11/6/2009. Thank you. Berry A. Cobb Infinity Portals LLC 866.921.8891

1 0

FW: DRAFT Charter for BC/based on staff iniital draft
by Marilyn Cade Oct. 20, 2009

Oct. 20, 2009

Dear BC members I was fortunate to have the opportunity to talk to Rob Hoggarth, ICANN staff on other topics, and learned that the ICANN staff forwarded a 'minimal' charter mark up document to the BC officers in August, 2009. I've posted as BC_Charter-revisions... etc. At that time, this document represented the minimal changes to meet the ICANN Board expectations for changes.However, the BC membership has expressed an interest in having a significant change in organizational structure. The BC officers, and some members worked on a signficant rewrite of the existing Charter and that was presented for a vote, and then, withdrawn in recognition of the members concerns. The status is that the membership do not support holding a vote on the extremely detailed version of the BC Charter that was presented. Nevertheless, the Charter that was developed in the BC officer process included a significant modification that most members support -- the creation of a executive committee. After exploring the staff developed 'minimal mark up' version, I took the BC officer developed version, extracted the section on new organizational structure, and added in some enhancements, according to what I have 'discerned' from the BC list exchanges. The new draft that I present, as a BC member, has the following characteristics: a six month life cyclea distributed accountability and leadership approachrecognition of the key role of the policy councilors and a longer term to their rolesfreezing any payment of dues while the membership works out what is reasonable and sustainable None of the controversial issues of sanctioning or 'disciplining' members is dealt with, since that deserves broader and longer term discussion. so the status quo exists for any such actions. The Credentials Committee remains in place, but for six months, with renewal as is, for a next term of 1 1/2 years. there is a new CSG representative role in the new executive committee, since the reality is that everyone will be extremely busy, and the BC deserves to have all players able to devote their time to their respective roles. The '6 month officers' will be consumed with overseeing the development of a full charter. I don't expect this to be perfect, but it uses the existing charter as a basis, provides 'mark up', makes only those changes that seem to have 'rough agreement' by various posting BC members, and creates a path forward. I have cc' Rob Hoggarth, since I am using a document that I requested from him. I would like to propose a BC membership discussion on the list, and as appropriate, a 'remote participation' in Seoul. I understand that all of the BC councilors are funded to travel to Seoul, including Philip Sheppard, outgoing BC councilor, so we can count on all to be fully available to the membership. It would be useful to hold a BC meeting to discuss any outstanding issues on Saturday or Sunday evening in Seoul/your very early a.m. in DC, and mid day in Europe. Please let's use the medium to see if we can find commonality on a draft Charter -- so that a discussion would be a good use of everyone's time. I apologize for a delay in sending a marked up version. I was unfortunately in an emergency room for many hours, due to the recurrence of a serious neck injury, and unable to use my left leg and arm for several hours. That was a shock, medically, and personally, but I'm rebounding, due to the miracle of pain medication and steroids!!! I wouldn't be boring you with this news, if I didn't feel so bad to be so late in sending in a detailed draft charter.

2 2

New Registry Services Proposals posted
by Philip Sheppard Oct. 20, 2009

Oct. 20, 2009

FYI _____ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Jones Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:10 AM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] New Registry Services Proposals posted Dear Council members, ICANN has commenced its 15-calendar day review period on two requests one from Neustar and one from Fundació puntCAT. Neustar has submitted a request to offer DNSSEC in dot-BIZ: http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2009010. puntCAT has submitted a request for one and two-character names in dot-CAT: http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2009009. Although public comments can be submitted at any time on a registry services proposal to registryservice(a)icann.org, this is not notification of a formal comment period. Information on the Registry Services Evaluation Process can be found at http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/. Please let me know if you have additional questions. Regards, Patrick -- Patrick L. Jones Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Tel: +1 310 301 3861 patrick.jones(a)icann.org patrickjones.tel

1 0

Re: Specific TM Issues (STI) drafting team of GNSO as followup to IRT
by Phil Corwin Oct. 19, 2009

Oct. 19, 2009

I definitely wish to play a constructive role in this effort. Philip S. Corwin Partner, Butera & Andrews 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20004 2026635347/Office 2022556172/Cell "Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey ----- Original Message ----- From: George Kirikos <icann(a)leap.com> To: BC gnso <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Cc: Phil Corwin; Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Sent: Mon Oct 19 13:29:41 2009 Subject: Specific TM Issues (STI) drafting team of GNSO as followup to IRT Hello, I understand there's a "Specific Trademark Issues" (STI) drafting team mailing list that's been formed, see: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07709.html Instead of the BC officers simply grabbing the spots for themselves without any consultation with the constituency: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07710.html it's my position that fresh blood needs to be involved, especially given what happened last time. A balanced position needs to be created. I would like to be on the mailing list, and I suspect Phil Corwin might also want to be involved, amongst others. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/

1 0

Fw: [council] Board letter to GNSO Council
by Zahid Jamil Oct. 19, 2009

Oct. 19, 2009

Sincerely, Zahid Jamil Barrister-at-law Jamil & Jamil Barristers-at-law 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan Cell: +923008238230 Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 Fax: +92 21 5655026 www.jamilandjamil.com *** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink *** -----Original Message----- From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:06:26 To: Avri Doria<avri(a)acm.org>; Council GNSO<council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] Board letter to GNSO Council Dear All, the mailing list is up and working: gnso-sti(a)icann.org (special trademark issues - sti) public archives are at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-sti/ and can be found on page: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/index.htm Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes and Jeff Neuman are subscribed to the list. Please let me know who else would like to join the drafting team and be added to the list. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria On 15 Oct 2009, at 14:23, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote: > If we do decide to go for a DT, I think this is a good idea as a way to start and fits patterns that have proven successful in taking the first steps in recent efforts. I do not want to wipe the weekend end schedule for this, however, as we have a published agenda for the weekend and have people committed to those tasks who are planing to come to Seoul in time or those meetings. This does not minimize the importance of starting on the Board letter on Specific Trademark Issues (STI) and DAGv3 and that is why I think the suggestion about forming a DT a good idea. Because of the press of time, we cannot wait for a meeting to do this. So I am suggesting we start now. I propose forming a DT composed of participants each SG and the active Liaison groups who are willing to focus their time next week (perhaps even finding time for a teleconference) and on the weekend to come up with a plan and start the work for the council to discuss/accept at the Wednesday open meeting and at the Thursday meeting. Unless there is strong objection from the members of the council, I ask each SG to name 2-3 members and the active ACSO liaison groups to name 1 representative each for the STI-DT and ask Glen (or some member of staff who is not traveling at the moment) to set up a mailing list, with open archive, for that team immediately. I think it is a good suggestion for those SGs that have members who were on the IRT as either members or observers to consider including them among the 2-3 volunteers. I think the SGs should find people in the SG, not necessarily council members to populate these meeting - and recommend that the people doing this find alternatives to replace (at least temporarily) them in other other ongoing ICANN tasks (except of course for council membership). We do have some unused meting room space on Saturday (11am on), so I suggest we schedule this group consider an open meeting during this opne time. The topic has already been scheduled for the Wednesday open meeting (https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?agenda_28_oct_2009 ), and has already been spoken of as the main topic for the Thursday meeting (https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi? agenda_29_oct_2009). a.

1 0

Specific TM Issues (STI) drafting team of GNSO as followup to IRT
by George Kirikos Oct. 19, 2009

Oct. 19, 2009

Hello, I understand there's a "Specific Trademark Issues" (STI) drafting team mailing list that's been formed, see: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07709.html Instead of the BC officers simply grabbing the spots for themselves without any consultation with the constituency: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07710.html it's my position that fresh blood needs to be involved, especially given what happened last time. A balanced position needs to be created. I would like to be on the mailing list, and I suspect Phil Corwin might also want to be involved, amongst others. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/

1 0