April 2011 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

Policy Calendar for 17-Feb-2011 BC Member call
by Steve DelBianco Sept. 16, 2011

Sept. 16, 2011

To: Business Constituency Members From: Steve DelBianco, vice chair for policy coordination Below is the latest BC policy calendar, for use during 17-Feb member call. (attachments are provided for Channel 4 below) Channel 1. BC participation in ICANN Public Comment processes: ICANN Public Comment page is at http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ Selected Public Comments open at this time: (in order of comment closing dates) 1: Accountability & Transparency Review Team FINAL recommendations (14-Feb) http://forum.icann.org/lists/atrt-final-recommendations/index.html#00010 2: Proposed process for recognizing new Constituencies (4-Mar) 3: Interim report on internationalized registration data (14-Mar) Note: BC members are encouraged to submit individual or company comments on any topic. Based on member interest, the BC selects topics on which to submit official positions. Channel 2. Support for discussion and votes of our representatives on GNSO Council Upcoming discussions & votes at 24-Feb GNSO Council meeting (15:00 UTC) Full agenda at http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-24feb11-en.htm Item 4: proposed guidelines for working groups. Should they be adopted or posted for further comment? Item 5: Responding to Board resolution asking GNSO for definitions & metrics for AOC terms (consumer choice, consumer trust, and competition). Several BC members have volunteered. No outreach yet from Rosemary Sinclair. Item 6: WHOIS studies. Staff posted an analysis of "Privacy & Proxy Relay & Reveal". Council must decide which of remaining 3 studies (Registrant Identification, Proxy and Privacy "abuse" and this Relay and Reveal study) staff should initiate. (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-chart-11feb11-en.pdf) Item 7: update on Joint DNS security and stability analysis working group. Draft charter at http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/dssa-draft-charter-12nov10-en.pdf Item 8: discussion of cross-community working groups Item 9: Staff feedback regarding Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) motion passed at 3-Feb meeting (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102 ) RESOLVED #1, the GNSO Council instructs ICANN Policy Staff to forward the two issues identified by the RAP IDT as having low resource requirements, WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1, to ICANN Compliance Staff for resolution. ICANN? Compliance Staff is requested to provide the GNSO Council with its feedback on the two recommendations and proposed implementation in a timely manner. RESOLVED #2, the GNSO Council requests an Issues Report on the current state of the UDRP. RESOLVED #3, the GNSO Council requests a discussion paper on the creation of non-binding best practices to help registrars and registries address the abusive registrations of domain names in accordance with the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report. Council Working Groups: (see GNSO Project Status List as of 27-Jan-2011, at http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf Channel 3. Supporting discussion and voting on policy matters before the Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG) (SarahDeutsch ) Channel 4. BC statements and responses during public meetings (Board meetings, outreach events, public forum, etc.) Upcoming Board/GAC Intercessional meeting in Brussels, 28-Feb to 1-Mar GAC 'scorecard' expected before 22-Feb. Selected previous BC positions on GAC-Board topics (attached) Affirmation review team for Whois (Susan Kawaguchi, Bill Smith) Affirmation reviewteam for SSR (Security, Stability, & Reslience) (Jeff Brueggeman)

8 23

Draft v1 of BC comments on latest gTLD Guidebook
by Steve DelBianco May 15, 2011

May 15, 2011

Per discussion on our 21-Apr member call, here is a draft framework for BC comments on the 15-Apr-2011 Guidebook. This comment period and docs are described at http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm These comments are due 15-May, giving us 18 days for edits, review, and approval. For this initial draft, I updated our Dec-2010 Guidebook comments in several ways: - Acknowledged areas where ICANN made changes consistent with BC recommendations. - Moved all our RPM concerns to Module 5 - Asked several questions for BC members (in red) - Added a proposed definition for "Single-Registrant TLD". We may hold a separate call on this. All BC members are invited to suggest edits. Please use track changes and circulate to BC list. I will assemble another draft version with all changes received as of May 1. Below are the primary contributors from our Dec-2011 comments, organized by module. Module 1: Introduction to New gTLD Application Process and Fees. (Berry Cobb, Ron Andruff ) Module 2: Evaluation Procedures. (Philip Sheppard, Jon Nevett, Adam Palmer, Zahid Jamil, Sarah Deutsch ) Module 3: Dispute Resolution. ( John Berard, Ron Andruff ) Module 4: String Contention. ( Ron Andruff ) Module 5: Transition to Delegation; Registry Agreement, Code of Conduct, RPMs ( Philip Sheppard, Fred Fellman, Berry Cobb, Jon Nevett, Sarah Deutsch ) Other notes: In our SFO comments, the BC said the new gTLD communications plan should help the world's businesses and users understand changes coming in the DNS. But I didn't see anything in the latest Guidebook about the Communications Plan. So that comment was not reflected in the attached draft. Steve DelBianco vice chair for policy coordination

6 8

New Article
by Michael D. Palage April 29, 2011

April 29, 2011

Hello All, I have recently published a new article that looks at the future of Internet governance should the ICANN Board not do the right thing in Singapore which may be of interest to some members, see http://www.circleid.com/posts/what_icann_can_learn_from_humpty_dumpty/ Best regards, Michael

1 0

ICANN and Singapore Meeting venue -- announcement to members
by Marilyn Cade April 29, 2011

April 29, 2011

Announcement: ICANN has posted the host country site for Singapore, and lists two hotels. You can book via ICANN's link to the website. However, as usual, there are other options for booking and some appear more reasonably priced. I went onto Expedia and got lower rate quotes for both those hotels, so members may want to check out other options than booking via ICANN/Host country web site if you decide to stay at the two hotels affiliated with the venue. AND, as usual, if some of you find other hotel deals, do let colleagues know. We will begin to formulate a working agenda for the CSG and BC's meetings shortly and will be asking for member input shortly. I have also been contacted by the IGF Asia, who will hold a two day national IGF just before ICANN. They are interested in making business aware of that event, which is still under development. Three things to do now: ALL OFF LIST BUT IMPORTANT: 1) Let Benedetta know if you will plan to come to Singapore in person so that she can begin to update the meetings list2) If you think you are interested in more information about the IGF Asia, let me know off list at marilynscade(a)hotmail.com3) If you are interested in participating in a remote hub [if we do arrange that with a sponsoring/coordinating member] in the Silicon Valley area of US West Coast, let Benedetta know that as well. That would require you to agree to attend thoughat one fixed site, so that it justifies asking a member to keep their offices open at extremely late hours. Benedetta will also be posting a schedule for further BC member calls shortly. [no need to repost about using a calendaring tool/that is under discussion within the ExComm/and will be addressed shortly]. Marilyn CadeBC Chair

3 2

Draft Letter to Board on Bundled TLD Applications
by Ron Andruff April 28, 2011

April 28, 2011

Dear colleagues, Fellow BC member, Andrew Mack, and I have developed a draft letter to the ICANN Board of Directors on the topic of offering bundled new gTLD applications with packaged pricing for IDN scripts. Defined, 'Bundling' is new gTLD applicants having the ability to include 'Clones' (defined as alternate scripts or language versions of a singular string) in their primary (IDN or ASCII independent) string application. 'Packaged Pricing' is any instance where an applicant receives a discount when applying for one or more clones with their singular application. Our hope is that the BC, with welcomed member input to finalize the draft, will become one of the signatories, along with other ICANN constituencies, stakeholder groups and supporting organizations. As time is short (the public comment period ends on 15 May 2011, followed by a GAC-Board teleconference five days later on 20 May 2011) we would kindly ask BC members to weigh in with your comments and support (or not) within the coming 7-day period (Thursday, May 5th). I accede to Steve or Marilyn on the process for the BC to become a signatory to the letter. On behalf of Andrew and myself, thank you in advance for your consideration. Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc.

1 0

RE: [bc-gnso] House Judiciary Subcommittee to Hold Hearing on gTLD Program
by john＠crediblecontext.com April 26, 2011

April 26, 2011

2 1

House Judiciary Subcommittee to Hold Hearing on gTLD Program
by Phil Corwin April 26, 2011

April 26, 2011

FYI-- http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_05022011.html Hearing Information Hearing on: "ICANN Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLD) Oversight Hearing" Wednesday 5/4/2011 - 10:00 a.m. 2141 Rayburn House Office Building Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet By Direction of the Chairman --As of yet, no witnesses listed -- Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

2 2

BC position on competition, trust, choice v1
by Ron Andruff April 25, 2011

April 25, 2011

Thank you for your contribution, Philip. RNA Partners supports your draft entirely, with one comment/edit regarding the text highlighted in red below. g Differentiation A TLD must be clearly differentiated from other TLDs Is the new TLD differentiated in a meaningful way from existing TLDs? Are the majority of new registrations creating new opportunities for the registrant? What is the scale of defensive registrations? This question will be difficult to answer because many current domain name registrants may well take additional names in new TLDs without knowing exactly what strategy they will use going forward, i.e. it may take a few years to determine which TLDs they will employ as their primary, secondary, etc. Migration will take time. In addition, some entities take names that they may use for marketing purposes at some future point in time, thus further clouding the issue. There are more issues, but I trust that these noted clarify how difficult it will be to quantify a true answer to this question. Thank you, RA Ronald N. Andruff President RNA Partners, Inc. 220 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10001 + 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

4 3

Candidates nominated for ICANN Board Seat 14
by Benedetta Rossi April 22, 2011

April 22, 2011

This will advise the BC Members of the outcome of the Nomination process for the ICANN Board Seat from the Non Contracted Parties House. There are two candidates, as noted below. The voting process and timeline was previously posted by Sarah Deutsch, CSG Rep. Kindest Regards,Benedetta RossiBC Secretariat ================ ANNOUNCEMENT: ELECTION FOR BOARD SEAT: The Non Contracted Parties House nominations for the ICANN Board seat 14 closed on Thursday, 21 April at 23:59 UTC. The two candidates that have been duly nominated and seconded by GNSO Councillors are Avri Doria and Bill Graham. Both candidates have accepted their nominations and their names will appear on the ballots for the first round of voting which starts on Monday, 25 April 2011. Ballots will be send to the GNSO Councilors from the NCPH.

1 0

Proposed GNSO Council Agenda 28 April 2011 at 11:00 UTC
by Benedetta Rossi April 22, 2011

April 22, 2011

Dear BC Members, Please find below the updated version of the Council Agenda. At the request of the Chair, I will be undertaking routine forwarding of updates to the BC. Thank you, Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 28 April 2011. http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-28apr11-en.htm The agenda on the Wiki has the latest updates: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+28+April+201… motions before Council can be viewed here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+28+April+20… This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 7 April 2011 for the GNSO Council. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-op-procedures-08apr11-en.pdf For convenience:* An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.Meeting Time 11:00 UTC Coordinated Universal Time:11:00 UTC - see below for local times (04:00 Los Angeles, 07:00 Washington DC,12:00 London, 13:00 Brussels, 19:00 Beijing; 21:00 Melbourne Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3uItem 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest • Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding “any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party’s judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion” in this meeting. Here is the definition provided in the procedures: “Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue.” The main issues for this meeting are: GNSO Project Decision Making GNSO ImprovementsSO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support WhoisNew gTLDs Compliance 1.2 Update any statements of interest 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: • 7 April 2011 Council minutes –approved on 21 April 2011Item 2: WHOIS studies (15 minutes) Refer to motion 1, deferred from previous meeting at IPC's request. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+7+April+2011 Refer to Motion 1 https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+28+April+20… 2.1 Discussion 2.2 Vote2.3 Suggestions on next steps for Whois Requirements (Avri Doria) Item 3: Pending Projects – Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) (15 minutes)Standard agenda item to update the Council on the GNSO's Pending Projects. Refer to motion 2 https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+28+April+20… 3. 1 Update on Pending Project: PPSC (Jeff Neuman) 3. 2 Discussion 3. 3 Vote Item 4: Motion on OSC Global Outreach Recommendations (10 minutes)Refer to motion approved by the Council at the 24 February 2011 GNSO Council meeting: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+24+February…. Specifically the following clauses:RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the document submitted by the OSC http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03fe… and directs Staff to post this document for forty-five (45) days in the ICANN Public Comment Forum.RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council shall take formal action on this document, including potential modification, as soon as possible after the conclusion of the public comment period.Refer to motion 3 https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+28+April+20… Discussion4. 2 Vote Item 5: Meeting with ICANN's new Compliance Director (10 minutes) The Council invites, Maguy Serad, ICANN’s senior compliance director to provide both an overview of her Compliance philosophy and her 30-60-90 day plan for the department. 5.1 Presentation from Compliance Director (Maguy Serad) 5.2 Discussion and questionsItem 6: Cartagena Board Resolution on Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation (10 minutes)Refer to Board resolution: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-10dec10-en.htm#6 Rosemary Sinclair has volunteered to lead. 6.1 Update from Rosemary Sinclair.6. 2 Discussion 6. 3 Next steps? Item 7: Joint SO/AC WG on New gTLD Applicant Support (JAS) (15 minutes)7.1 Update from co-Chairs (Rafik Dammak and Carlton Samuels).7. 2 Discussion 7. 3 Next steps? Item 8: UDRP Issues Paper (10 minutes)8.1 Update from Staff (Margie Milam) 8.2 Discussion8.3 Next steps Item 9: Joint ccNSO-GNSO IDN Working Group Final Report on Single Character IDN TLDs (JIG) (10 minutes)Refer to motion approved by the GNSO Council at the April 7, 2011 meeting https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+7+April+201… ccNSO Council has since asked that the GNSO Council not forward the report to the Board until it has had an opportunity to address a few issues it has with the report.In the meantime, it is suggested that the GNSO Council submit, as part of the DAGv6 Public Comment period, its comments on those parts of the JIG report that pertain to new gTLDs.9.1 Discussion9.2 Next stepsItem 10. Any Other Business (5 minutes) 10.1 Possible topics for Singapore weekend GNSO sessions Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3)9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: 1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House; 2. Initiate a Policy Development Process (“PDP”) Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House; 3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House (“GNSO Supermajority”); 4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation; 5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and 6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that “a two-thirds vote of the council” demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision.Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting‟s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances,announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between March & October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-7+1DST 04:00 Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-5+1DST 06:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 07:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 08:00 Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 08:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+1DST 12:00 Tunis, Tunisia (CET)UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 13:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 13:00 Moscow, Russian Federation UTC+3+1DST 15:00 Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 16:00 Beijing, China UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 20:00 Melbourne,/Sydney Australia (EST) UTC+10+0DST 21:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2011, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com

1 0