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

ALERTS from the Secretariat: 2012 Will See One of the Biggest Changes in the History of the Internet. Are You Ready?
by Benedetta Rossi Sept. 15, 2011

Sept. 15, 2011

2012 Will See One of the Biggest Changes in the History of the Internet. Are You Ready?14 September 2011In January 2012, companies, organisations, causes, start-ups and even cities will be able to apply for their own web domain. This represents a fundamental change to the way we use the Internet and many feel this will offer new global branding and marketing opportunities.Join the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), overseers of the new domain application and approval process, for an informative and thought-provoking discussion on all aspects of the new Generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) program.For more information on ICANN's new gTLD program, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/factsheet-new-gtld-program-20jul11… [PDF, 1.15 MB]Rod Beckstrom, CEO, ICANNLesley Cowley OBE, CEO, NominetLorna Gradden, Director, Com LaudeKevin Murphy, Journalist, Blogger & AnalystJonathan Hargreaves, Edelman (Chair)Date:Time: Venue:RSVP:Tuesday, 20th September 20118am - Breakfast8:30am - Panel Discussion and Q&A10am - CloseEdelman, Southside, 105 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6QTandrew.robertson(a)edelman.com http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-3-14sep11-en.htm Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat

1 0

ICANN coms plan underway
by Chris Chaplow Sept. 14, 2011

Sept. 14, 2011

Marilyn, In spite of much critism from Kieren and others on .nxt blog and twitter it looks to looks to me like the ICANN communications plan has started out to be more balanced and in line with BC position. I want to make clear that ICANN is an organization that is not advocating new gTLDs for anyone, said Beckstrom. Our role is merely facilitation to implement the policy and the programs approved by our community, so we are here to educate not to advocate. <http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/release-12sep11-en.pdf> http://www.icann.org/en/news/releases/release-12sep11-en.pdf Perhaps helped by your breakfast with Barbara and my phone call with Scott. Scott Pinzon told me it was likely to be in two phases now to Dec 11 mostly directed applicants, Jan 12 onwards directed to users. best Chris Chaplow Managing Director Andalucia.com S.L. Avenida del Carmen 9 Ed. Puertosol, Puerto Deportivo 1ª Planta, Oficina 30 Estepona, 29680 Malaga, Spain Tel: + (34) 952 897 865 Fax: + (34) 952 897 874 E-mail: <mailto:chris@andalucia.com> chris(a)andalucia.com Web: <http://www.andalucia.com/> www.andalucia.com Information about Andalucia, Spain.

1 0

Open Public Comments + Release of FY12 Op Plan and Budget Update
by Benedetta Rossi Sept. 14, 2011

Sept. 14, 2011

Dear BC Members, Please find below the links to the currently open Public Comments from the ICANN web site: Open for Comments NowTitleClose Date [UTC Time]Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Recommendations for ICANN Board Consideration15 September 2011 [23:59]Phase II of Public Comments Process Enhancements30 September 2011 [23:59]Revisions to Conflicts of Interest Policy and Bylaws to Allow Board to Consider Compensation for Director Services3 October 2011 [06:59] Please also find below the updated FY12 Operating Plan and Budget, as published on the ICANN web site: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-12sep11-en.htm Updated FY12 Operating Plan and Budget12 September 2011On 24 June 2011 in Singapore, the ICANN Board approved the FY12 Operating Plan and Budget [PDF, 2.08 MB] as noted in the Board resolutions posted at http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-24jun11-en.htm.Based on the Board's decision to approve the launch of the New gTLD Program and to open the application window on 12 January 2012, the application processing now extends into the 2013 fiscal year. Therefore, it became obvious that including the New gTLD revenue and expenses across FY12 and FY13 presents a more accurate view of the overall FY12 budget, which can be seen in the documents below:A new schedule [PDF, 89 KB] which simply summarizes the consolidated budget detail into one table;A new schedule presenting the estimated cash flows for the New gTLD program [PDF, 120 KB], to include the processing of the 1st round applications over FY12 and FY13.Furthermore, a revised schedule of New gTLD program related expenses, the allocation by EAG (Expense Area Group), and a re-allocation of approved constituency funding from three At-Large regional meetings to one General Assembly are reflected in this updated FY12 Budget [PDF, 1.53 MB].Page 6 / Figure 1-2: revised table to reflect the breakdown of New gTLD program related expenses.Page 20 / Figure 4-2: revised table to reflect the re-allocation of the At-Large regional meeting funding from three meetings to one General Assembly.Page 62 /Figure 7-1: revised tables to reflect the breakdown of New gTLD program related expenses.Page 64 / Figure 7-2: revised tables to reflect the breakdown of New gTLD program related expenses.Page 79 /Figure C-2: revised tables to reflect updated allocation by Expense Area Group (EAG)Page 80 /Figure C-3: revised tables to reflect updated allocation by Expense Area Group (EAG)Throughout the year, up to date financial information, including the Board adopted FY12 Operating Plan and Budget, can be found on the ICANN Financial Information webpage. Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat

2 1

FW: [council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations
by Zahid Jamil Sept. 13, 2011

Sept. 13, 2011

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 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025 Fax: +92 21 35655026 <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/> www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited. From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Zahid Jamil Sent: 13 September 2011 02:12 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org; gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org; 'Glen de Saint Gery'; 'Glen de Saint Géry' Cc: 'Marika Konings'; 'John Berard' Subject: [council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations Dear Councillors, Please find below a motion on RAP I am proposing for the next GNSO Council call: Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group submitted its report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf) Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and decided to form an implementation drafting team to draft a proposed approach with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report; Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team submitted its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010 (see <http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf > http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf) ; Whereas the GNSO Council considered the proposed approached at its Working Session at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena; Whereas the GNSO Council acted on a number of RAP recommendations at its meeting on 3 February 2011 (see <http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102> http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102) Whereas the GNSO Council requested feedback from ICANN Compliance in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1 and a response was received on 23 February 2011 ( <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html) In addition, a discussion with Compliance Staff was held at the ICANN meeting in San Francisco. Whereas the GNSO Council considered the remaining RAP recommendations in further detail during its working session at the ICANN meeting in Singapore based on an overview prepared by ICANN Staff (see <http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/overview-rapwg-recommendations-18may11 -en.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/overview-rapwg-recommendations-18may11- en.pdf). NOW THEREFORE BE IT: RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its feedback in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and determines that no further work on this recommendation is needed. The GNSO Council welcomes the commitment of the ICANN Compliance Department to report on compliance activities and publish data about WHOIS accessibility, on at least an annual basis' (see (http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html) RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its feedback in relation to Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1 and determines that no further work on this recommendation is needed. RESOLVED, the GNSO Council determines that additional information is needed from the Registrar Stakeholder Group with regard to the conditional Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #2 before an Issue Report should be requested of Staff. The GNSO Council hereby requests that the Registrar Stakeholder Group provide further information and data on the nature and scope of the issue of Fake Renewal Notices to help inform the GNSO Councils and its RAP WG deliberations on whether an Issue Report should be requested. A small group of volunteers consisting of registrar representatives and others interested (including former RAP WG members) should be formed to prepare such a request, work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group to obtain the information requested and report back to the GNSO Council accordingly. RESOLVED, in response to WHOIS Access recommendation #1, the GNSO Council requests the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team to consider including the issue of WHOIS Access as part of the survey it has been tasked to develop. If the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team is of the view that it is not appropriate or timely to include WHOIS Access as part of the survey, it should inform the GNSO Council accordingly so that the GNSO Council can determine what next steps, if any, might be appropriate at this stage in relation to this recommendation. RESOLVED, with regard to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation and determines to defer its consideration until it evaluates the outcome of Malicious Use of Domain Names recommendation #1, which aims to develop best practices to help registrars and registries address the illicit use of domain names. In light of the pending request to Staff to develop a Discussion Paper on the Malicious Use of Domain Names, the GNSO Council believes that the upcoming review and analysis of this Discussion Paper may serve to inform the Council of the issues related to the Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices recommendation. RESOLVED, in regard to the recommendations on cross-TLD Registration Scam and Domain Kiting/Tasting, the GNSO Council Chair shall communicate to the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) the findings of the RAP WG in this regard and request that the SSAC consider evaluating and/or monitoring these abuses. If the SSAC elects to conduct this work, the GNSO Council requests that the SSAC inform the GNSO Council if it believes that further policy work by the GNSO Council should be undertaken to address these two types of abuse. In addition, the GNSO Council suggests that the issue of cross-TLD registration scam be included in the agenda of its next meeting with the ccNSO Council since this type of abuse may also affect ccTLDs. RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Uniformity of Reporting, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and hereby requests the ICANN Compliance Department to report on existing systems to report and track violations and/or complaints; improvements / changes made since the RAPWG Report or foreseen in the near future, and: identify gaps and any improvements that might be desirable but not foreseen at this stage. Further consideration of this Meta Issue, including the recommendations and considerations of the RAP WG in this regard, is deferred pending receipt of such information from the ICANN Compliance Department. RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Uniformity of Contracts, the GNSO Council requests an Issue Report to evaluate whether a minimum baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in scope ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to address the most common forms of registration abuse. RESOLVED, in response to the recommendations on Gripe Sites, Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #2, and; Cybersquatting recommendation #2, since the RAPWG did not achieve consensus on these recommendations, the GNSO Council defers undertaking further policy work on these recommendations at this time. RESOLVED, in response to Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #1, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and agrees with the RAPWG that no further action is called for at this time. 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 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025 Fax: +92 21 35655026 <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/> www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited.

1 0

NOTE THE DATE: WEBINAR- JAS WG Final Report - 19 September 12:00 UTC & 22:00 UTC
by Benedetta Rossi Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

Dear BC Members, As BC Secretariat I will be forwarding announcements of particular BC relevance to the BC-GNSO list for your individual action and awareness. Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat JAS WG Final Report Webinar Please note the date and time, details about how to join the JAS WG Final Report webinar will follow later: Date: September 19th 2011.Times: 12:00 UTC and 22:00 UTC Time for each session: 90 minutesStructure: Adobe Connect with a slide presentation (ppt) along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Sessions are duplicated. Recorded.Intro/moderators: Carlton Samuels, Rafik Dammak, Karla Valente Speakers: Avri Doria and Alan Greenberg; members from the JAS WG for the Q&A session

1 0

BC Call/Meeting Summaries
by Benedetta Rossi Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

Dear BC Members, Just a quick reminder that all BC Members Calls are transcribed, and that from the transcript I draft call reports which are posted on the BC web site along with the transcripts: http://www.bizconst.org/Telephone_conferences.htm The BC Meetings are also summarized and materials can be found here: http://www.bizconst.org/icann_meetings.htm Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat

1 0

BC Pre Council Members Call, Friday 16th of September, 10am EST (2pm UTC)
by Benedetta Rossi Sept. 12, 2011

Sept. 12, 2011

Dear BC Members, Please hold the date for the upcoming Pre Council Members Call, taking place on Friday September 16th at 10am EST (2pm UTC). Please let me know if you require a dial out. Dial in details and agenda will follow. Thank you, Kindest Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat

1 0

defining "Consumer Trust" in new gTLD reviews
by Steve DelBianco Sept. 6, 2011

Sept. 6, 2011

BC members — on last week's member call I discussed our role in a working group to define Consumer Trust, Choice, and Competition for the required review of the new gTLD program 1 year later. Below is a note I sent to the working group today, regarding whether a review of "Consumer Trust" should examine whether new gTLD registries have followed relevant national laws -- as proposed by the BC in Philip Sheppard's draft document and at the workshop in Singapore. From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org>> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 17:54:40 +0000 To: "gnso-consumercci-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org>" <gnso-consumercci-dt(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Draft Definitions Just a follow-up on discussions from last week's call, regarding reference to "national laws" in the definition of Consumer Trust. I had proposed this definition, based on the BC's original draft: Consumer Trust is the degree of confidence among registrants and users that a TLD registry operator is fulfilling its proposed purpose and is complying with ICANN policies and all relevant national laws. Michael and others suggested removing "all" before "relevant". That makes sense, and perhaps we should say "applicable" instead of "relevant", given some of the citations I found in ICANN documents for "national laws": 1. Articles of Incorporation: “The Corporation shall operate for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and applicable international conventions and local law" 2. Applicant Guidebook: “National Law” is cited as potential basis for Government objections, GAC Early Warning, and/or GAC advice 3. Affirmation of Commitments: “9.3.1 ICANN additionally commits to enforcing its existing policy relating to WHOIS, subject to applicable laws” 4. Bylaws: regarding ccTLDs: “provided that such policies do not conflict with the law applicable to the ccTLD manager” I realize that some in our WG do not want to cite national laws at all. I did the above research to support my belief that we should cite national laws as a nod to governments and the GAC. This was before we saw the European Commission working papers, which also cite the importance of national laws (attached). However flawed the EC papers may be, they indicate the political lens through which the new gTLD program will be judged by governments. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

1 0

FW: [council] Final Issue Report - Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part C
by Zahid Jamil Sept. 1, 2011

Sept. 1, 2011

FYI 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 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025 Fax: +92 21 35655026 <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/> www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited. From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: 30 August 2011 12:53 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Final Issue Report - Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part C Dear All, For your convenience, the Final Issue Report – Inter-Transfer Policy part C http://gnso.icann.org/issues/issue-report-irtp-c-29aug11-en.pdf is posted on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/issues http://gnso.icann.org/policies http://gnso.icann.org/index.html Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0