October 2012 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on ICANN's proposed rules for TM Matching
by Steve DelBianco May 30, 2013

May 30, 2013

As discussed during yesterday's BC meeting in Toronto, Elisa Cooper has proposed a comment regarding ICANN's proposed plan for matching rules for names entered in the Trademark Clearinghouse. ICANN's Public Comment page for the proposed matching rules is here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/tmch-docs-24sep12-en.htm>. The Matching Rules document we are commenting on is here<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/matching-rules-2…>. Below is the BC comment proposed by Elisa Cooper: Subject: Trademark Clearinghouse Matching Rules for “@” and “&” Upon review of the possible methods for translating “@” and “&” as described in the “Explanatory Memorandum: Implementing the Matching Rules”, the Business Constituency requests that the languages for translations of “@” and “&” be chosen on a per-record basis by the trademark owner. The memorandum suggests that the language of translations should be based upon the official language(s) of the trademark registry. Restricting translations to the official language of the trademark registry is problematic, particularly for global brands or for trademarks registered in countries where there is no official language. Furthermore, requiring that translations of “@” and “&” match the official language of the trademark registry would likely result in additional costs to brand owners for additional submissions of the same mark to the Trademark Clearinghouse. Initial comments closed 16-Oct. At least one comment (link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-docs-sep12/msg00007.html>) refers to the language restriction, so the BC could file a reply comment by the Reply closing date of 7-Nov. That gives us enough time to allow our regular 14-day review and approval period. So, please reply all with your questions or suggestions regarding this draft, before 30-Oct-2012. Steve DelBianco Vice chair for policy coordination Business Constituency

22 59

Policy calendar for 2-Oct-2012 BC member call
by Steve DelBianco Jan. 13, 2013

Jan. 13, 2013

Here is the latest BC policy calendar, for use during our 2-Oct-2012 member call. Channel 1. BC participation in ICANN Public Comment process: ICANN Public Comment page is <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> here<https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment><http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> <https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment> 1. DSSA Working Group Phase 1 report (reply comments close 21-Oct) 2. SSAC report on dot-less domains (reply comments close 5-Nov) 3. TM Clearinghouse rules for matching names / verifying proof of use (initial comments close 15-Oct) 4.. Draft policy recommendations for selection of IDN ccTLDs (initial comments close 18-Oct) 5. Protection of Olympics / Red Cross names — drafting team recommendations (initial comments close 19-Oct) 6. Community input and advice process (initial comments close 25-Oct) 7. Community input on draft 2013-2016 Strategic Plan (initial comments close 13-Nov) Note: BC members are encouraged to submit individual / company comments. The BC selects topics on which to submit official positions based on member interest. --- Channel 2. Support for discussion and votes of our representatives on GNSO Council John Berard and Zahid Jamil, BC Councilors Council work sessions in Toronto on 13-Oct (agenda<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio…>) and 14-Oct (agenda<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Working+Sessio…>). Council meeting on 17-Oct-2012, 15:00 Eastern. Agenda not yet published; two motions<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+17+October+…> are noticed: 1. BC motion to request an Issue Report on the current state of uniformity in the mechanisms to initiate, track, and analyze policy-violation reports 2. BC motion to Initiate PDP on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse GNSO Project Status available <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> here<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> --- Channel 3. Supporting discussion/voting on matters before the Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG) Elisa Cooper, CSG Liaison, and Marilyn Cade (alternate) Upcoming elections for GNSO Council Chair and Vice-Chair --- Channel 4. BC statements and responses during public meetings (outreach events, public forum, etc.) Non-Commercial Users Group (NCUC) is hosting a day-long ICANN policy conference on 12-Oct at Fairmont Royal York Hotel (agenda<http://www.amiando.com/NCUC-ICANN45.html?page=838202>). Phil Corwin is on a panel. Thick Whois PDP drafting team (Susan Kawaguchi, Elisa Cooper) Final report from the WG on definitions and metrics for Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition in the new gTLD program. (Link<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-17aug12-en.pdf>) Remaining implementation work for gTLD expansion plan, incl BC requests for specific improvements (here<http://forum.icann.org/lists/newgtlds-defensive-applications/msg00022.html>). These previously-approved recommendations were discussed at US Govt meeting on 5-Sep. Implementing Affirmation review recommendations for Whois (Susan Kawaguchi, Lynn Goodendorf, Bill Smith) Implementing Affirmation review recommendations for SSR (Security, Stability, & Resilience) (Jeff Brueggeman)

1 3

NetChoice blog post: The Real Question of Internet Governance
by Steve DelBianco Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Just posted this blog in advance of the IGF meeting next week in Baku. Link<http://www.netchoice.org/the-real-question-of-internet-governance/> and below. The Real Question of Internet Governance The latter half of 2012 is one of the heaviest periods of Internet governance activity ever, with three critical events that could change the course of the next decade. So it’s important to take a step back from the catchall phrase “Internet governance,” and ask what it even means… and why it really matters. It started earlier this month in Toronto with the 45th meeting of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>), and continues through the Internet Governance Forum (IGF<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>) in Baku, Azerbaijan in November. Then, December brings us the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT<http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Pages/overview.aspx>) in Dubai. Taken together, these events present a series of critical decision points for the Internet’s future. At a recent preparatory meeting for the IGF in Washington, one speaker said these events attempt to answer the question, “Who should govern the Internet?” But I countered by saying the real question is, “When people use the Internet, how are their activities best governed?” I asked this because it’s critical for people to remember that very few, if any, of the online activities swept in under the rubric of Internet governance are unique to the Internet. The activities we do online are often good: expressing ourselves, rallying support for causes, communicating with our friend and families. And there are bad activities, too: stealing, fraud, bullying and harassing, fomenting hatred and discrimination. All these activities have been around long before the Internet, and all continue to be caused by people in the physical world. As a result, questions of how to “govern” or “regulate” those activities has been exhaustively discussed, debated and coded into law. So what makes the Internet different? Clearly there are differences or I wouldn’t need to spend much of this year in airports and conference hotels. But what are the distinctions that make Internet governance different from regular governance of the very same activities? I would argue that it comes down to three big differences about the Internet: time, distance, and identity. How the Internet compresses time is obvious to anyone who lived before its adoption. The term “Internet time” was coined to reflect the breakneck pace at which change, both good and bad, appears and propagates on the Internet. On the good side, the Internet dramatically speeds the commerce, communication and organization, in a manner that extends far beyond simple convenience. The dark side of “Internet time” is that criminals, pirates and fraudsters can do much more damage, in a much shorter amount of time, than was possible in the physical world. The Internet has also warped our concept of distance. We travel around the world and back in a matter of keystrokes, along with our wallets and personal information. Distance also means that a criminal in Russia may as well be standing directly behind me on a crowded bus, given the ease with which he can take my property and identity from afar. The famous New Yorker cartoon sums up the identity issue perfectly: “on the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog,” — or a trusted vendor, a crook or anyone else for that matter. The message to users whether online or offline is still, caveat emptor. Still, the discussion of these activities in the online world is what animates the global conversation about Internet Governance at IGF, at the United Nation’s WCIT, and to a lesser extent, at ICANN. The obfuscation of time, distance, and identity have raised the stakes, and brought a lot of new stakeholders into the debate. How we address these core Internet differentiators will determine how the Internet evolves, and how those activities are restricted or encouraged. So while we all eagerly await the answer of “who” shall regulate the Internet, we may be missing critical work on questions of “how” the activities of real people are regulated, whether offline or online. And from what I can see, that is the more important question before us. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

2 1

Canceled: Update on New gTLD RPM Working Groups
by Troy Harwood-Jones Oct. 24, 2012

Oct. 24, 2012

BC Member, Please attend this meeting for an update on the progress of the three Working Groups. The purpose of this call is to review the status of the Working Groups. 1. Working Group #1 led by J. Scott Evans – Discussion to be led by Steve DelBianco and others * Focused on Trademark Clearinghouse technical implementation; Sunrise and Claims extension; and inclusion of abusively registered names into the Trademark Clearinghouse 2. Working Group #2 led by Fabricio Vayra

1 0

Canceled: Update on New gTLD RPM Working Groups
by Troy Harwood-Jones Oct. 24, 2012

Oct. 24, 2012

BC Member, Please attend this meeting for an update on the progress of the three Working Groups. The purpose of this call is to review the status of the Working Groups. 1. Working Group #1 led by J. Scott Evans – Discussion to be led by Steve DelBianco and others * Focused on Trademark Clearinghouse technical implementation; Sunrise and Claims extension; and inclusion of abusively registered names into the Trademark Clearinghouse 2. Working Group #2 led by Fabricio Vayra

1 0

Canceled: Update on New gTLD RPM Working Groups
by Elisa Cooper Oct. 24, 2012

Oct. 24, 2012

BC Member, Please attend this meeting for an update on the progress of the three Working Groups. The purpose of this call is to review the status of the Working Groups. 1. Working Group #1 led by J. Scott Evans - Discussion to be led by Steve DelBianco and others * Focused on Trademark Clearinghouse technical implementation; Sunrise and Claims extension; and inclusion of abusively registered names into the Trademark Clearinghouse 2. Working Group #2 led by Fabricio Vayra - Discussion to be Elisa Cooper and others * Focused on implementation of the URS (Uniform Rapid Suspension) 3. Working Group #3 led by Brian Beckham and Claudio de Gangi - Discussion to be led by Susan Kawaguchi and others * Focused on the implementation of a blocking mechanism for second-level registrations Best, Elisa Elisa Cooper Director of Product Marketing MarkMonitor 208 389-5779 [X] Passcodes/Pin codes: Participant passcode: BC For security reasons, the passcode will be required to join the call. Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 06-800-12755 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 Restrictions may exist when accessing freephone/toll free numbers using a mobile telephone.

1 0

Update on New gTLD RPM Working Groups
by Elisa Cooper Oct. 24, 2012

Oct. 24, 2012

BC Member, Please attend this meeting for an update on the progress of the three Working Groups. The purpose of this call is to review the status of the Working Groups. 1. Working Group #1 led by J. Scott Evans - Discussion to be led by Steve DelBianco and others * Focused on Trademark Clearinghouse technical implementation; Sunrise and Claims extension; and inclusion of abusively registered names into the Trademark Clearinghouse 2. Working Group #2 led by Fabricio Vayra - Discussion to be Elisa Cooper and others * Focused on implementation of the URS (Uniform Rapid Suspension) 3. Working Group #3 led by Brian Beckham and Claudio de Gangi - Discussion to be led by Susan Kawaguchi and others * Focused on the implementation of a blocking mechanism for second-level registrations Best, Elisa Elisa Cooper Director of Product Marketing MarkMonitor 208 389-5779 [X] Passcodes/Pin codes: Participant passcode: BC For security reasons, the passcode will be required to join the call. Dial in numbers: Country Toll Numbers Freephone/ Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0519 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4842 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1944 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7713 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5223 1-800-657-260 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8205-8129 1-800-657-260 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-113 0800-005-259 BELGIUM 32-2-400-9861 0800-3-8795 BRAZIL 0800-7610651 CHILE 1230-020-2863 CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4789 10800-712-1670 CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4789 10800-120-1670 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156474 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-64 800-700-177 DENMARK 45-7014-0284 8088-8324 ESTONIA 800-011-1093 FINLAND 358-9-5424-7162 0-800-9-14610 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-85 080-511-1496 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-70-60-72 080-511-1496 GERMANY 49-69-2222-20362 0800-664-4247 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0687 00800-12-7312 HONG KONG 852-3001-3863 800-962-856 HUNGARY 06-800-12755 INDIA INDIA A: 000-800-852-1268 INDIA INDIA B: 000-800-001-6305 INDIA INDIA C: 1800-300-00491 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3982 IRELAND 353-1-246-7646 1800-992-368 ISRAEL 1-80-9216162 ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3600-6007 800-986-383 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4799 0066-33-132439 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5191 0066-33-132439 LATVIA 8000-3185 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1364 MALAYSIA 1-800-81-3065 MEXICO 001-866-376-9696 NETHERLANDS 31-20-718-8588 0800-023-4378 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4771 0800-447-722 NORWAY 47-21-590-062 800-15157 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072065 PERU 0800-53713 PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3716 POLAND 00-800-1212572 PORTUGAL 8008-14052 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-0144011 SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110087 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9230 800-120-4663 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-25 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-80414 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1083 00798-14800-7352 SPAIN 34-91-414-25-33 800-300-053 SWEDEN 46-8-566-19-348 0200-884-622 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-6398 0800-120-032 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7379 00801-137-797 THAILAND 001-800-1206-66056 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9025 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3225 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2125 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7108-6370 0808-238-6029 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1425 0808-238-6029 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3421 USA 1-517-345-9004 866-692-5726 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3702 Restrictions may exist when accessing freephone/toll free numbers using a mobile telephone.

1 0

Business Constituency Comments on DSSA Working Group Phase 1 Report
by Steve DelBianco Oct. 24, 2012

Oct. 24, 2012

Below are the BC comments we submitted regarding the DNS Security & Stability Analysis (DSSA) Working Group Phase 1 report. Thanks to Scott McCormick for his excellent draft. I worked Marilyn's comments in there before submitting. (Link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/dssa-phase-1-report/msg00002.html> to comment view) Subject: Business Constituency Comments on DSSA Working Group Phase 1 Report The Business Constituency is concerned with the security and stability of the DNS, as it severely impacts our membership base. ICANN's decisions, in particular, impact the diverse and distributed businesses whose infrastructure and services make the Internet work. The Phase 1 report shows the effort put forward to start addressing the types of risks to the global DNS as it pertains to security and stability, and is a welcome update on the progress of the WG. We urge the DSSA WG to continue and complete the work defined by its charter. We look forward to a final report detailing the risks and threats to the security and stability of the DNS. DSSA-WG Background: The objective of the DSSA Working Group is to draw upon the collective expertise of the participating SOs and ACs, solicit expert input and advice and report to the respective participating SOs and ACs on: The actual level, frequency and severity of threats to the DNS. This is the first of two reports from the DNS Security & Stability Analysis Working Group. The goal of this document is to bring forward the substantial work that has been completed to date and describe the work that remains. This has been in many respects a “pioneering” cross-constituency security-assessment effort that has developed knowledge and processes that others will hopefully find helpful and can be reused in the future. The DSSA has: * Established a cross-constituency working group and put the organizational framework to manage that group in place * Clarified the system, organizational and functional scope of the effort * Developed an approach to handling confidential information, should such information be required for certain assessments * Selected and tailored a risk-assessment methodology to structure the work * Developed and tested mechanisms to rapidly collect and consolidate risk-assessment scenarios across and broad and diverse group of interested participants * Used an “alpha-test” of those systems to develop the high-level risk-scenarios in this report. Those scenarios will serve as the starting point for the remainder of the effort. Work that remains: * Perform a proof of concept to refine and streamline the methodology on one broad risk-scenario topic with the goal of reducing cycle time and making it more accessible to a broader community * Roll the methodology out to progressively broader groups of participants to introduce the methodology to the community and further improve the process and tools on the way to completing the assessment. * It is essential that this work involve businesses beyond ICANN's contracted parties, although such broad engagement is not sufficiently evident at this point. Outreach should be expanded to the non-contracted parties who support Internet infrastructure and services. Rapportuer for these comments: Scott McCormick Submitted by: Steve DelBianco, vice chair for policy coordination, Business Constituency

1 0

What One ICANN Journalist Thinks
by Chris Chaplow Oct. 23, 2012

Oct. 23, 2012

Members, I thought this article might be of interest to members. What One ICANN Journalist Thinks by <http://www.bna.com/thomas-otoole-b12884906786/> Thomas O'Toole I had the opportunity to participate on the " <http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34407> What the Journalists Think" panel at last week's Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers meeting in Toronto, and that was enjoyable, and flattering, and I had the opportunity to meet a few other folks that I have admired for a long time. All good, eh, except for the fact that the panel moderator didn't ask many of the questions he said he would ask. So now I have several pages of "unused" notes. Unused until now. There aren't many frustrations covering ICANN, actually. Covering ICANN is a treat compared to covering Congress. At ICANN, the discussion topics are interesting and thoughtfully explained by experts in their fields. Nobody is going to describe the internet as a "system of tubes," or deliver long-winded commentaries about irrelevant topics <http://www.bna.com/icann-journalists-think-b17179870406/#fn:pubcomm> 1, or pander to humanity's basest motivations, or treat the audience as if it were composed entirely of third graders. At ICANN meetings, nearly everyone from ICANN officials to attorneys to networking techies will take a question from a journalist. Even on mundane "I can't believe you don't know this" topics. I have a few small frustrations, however <http://www.bna.com/icann-journalists-think-b17179870406/> http://www.bna.com/icann-journalists-think-b17179870406/ 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

Re: [bc-gnso] 2013 Nom Com October Report Card
by Marilyn Cade Oct. 23, 2012

Oct. 23, 2012

Excellent ideas. Also heartening to hear Board comment that perhaps the review of NC could be pulled up, in timing. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Ron Andruff <randruff(a)rnapartners.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:43:57 To: <mmr(a)darwin.ptvy.ca.us> Cc: <bc-gnso(a)icann.org>; <excomm(a)bizconst.org>; <emailsignet(a)mailcan.com> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] 2013 Nom Com October Report Card Mike, With your experience on the Nom Com, you, of all people, appreciate the significant steps toward transparency that this year's Committee have undertaken and I'm glad that they resonate positively. Regarding your comments on the SOI, Waudo and I will be sure to take them to the Committee. As for the Board Governance discussion, indeed, we took advantage of Toronto 45 to have that meeting and we have a revised position on that in place. Thank you for your two insightful comments. Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc. ---------------- From: Michael Roberts [mailto:mmr1936@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mike Roberts Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:02 PM To: Ron Andruff Cc: 'Bc GNSO list '; excomm(a)bizconst.org; 'Waudo Siganga' Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] 2013 Nom Com October Report Card Importance: High Ron - Great report. Glad to see some NomCom "sacred cows" biting the dust. Here are a couple of other things that might improve NomCom performance and success rate. - The Statement of Interest (SOI) process is a killer for many highly qualified potential applicants. There is no intrinsic reason why a potential Board member should be forced to complete it as currently required. The committee has other means of acquiring the necessary information, and/or having third parties complete it with the consent and participation of the candidate. In my time on two recent NC's, there seemed to be a notion that having all the SOI's done exactly the same way "leveled the playing field." Couldn't be farther from the truth. The object here is to identify and recruit the best talent for the Board, not to let process get in the way. - The Board workload, as currently described to applicants, is another killer. I have a lot of non-profit Board experience in my background, and no other organization comes close to the level of time commitment required of ICANN Board members. Even allowing for our unique structure and status, the recent situation is depriving ICANN of valuable Board talent. With Fadi having set new directions and appointed a strong executive team, I think the description of time commitment could be scaled back. Why doesn't the NomCom have a specific discussion with the Board Governance Cmte on this important issue and see if a revised look isn't possible? Regards, - Mike On Oct 23, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Ron Andruff wrote: Dear members, On behalf of Waudo Siganga and I, your 2013 Nominating Committee (Nom Com) member representatives, I am pleased to send you our Committee's first ever monthly 'Report Card', just one of the innovations launched at our first meeting, for more detailed reporting back to the ICANN community. This document represents a sea change in transparency for the Nom Com and one that we believe will underscore the Committee's commitment to openness and integrity in this year's process of selecting strong candidates to fill key roles in ICANN's ever-improving leadership. Regarding our 2013 Committee's new regime of openness, our Chairman, Yrjo Lansipuro noted: "We re-examined the reasons behind the exaggerated secrecy that has surrounded the NomCom institution. We went back to the 2007 NomCom Review, which offered an explanation: the justified requirement of absolute candidate confidentiality has led members and staff to "err on the side of caution" and treat many other aspects of the NomCom's operation as confidential "just to be safe." The 2007 Review noted: "Secrecy beyond what is required to preserve candidate confidentiality shields the NomCom from outside pressure and influence but also damages its credibility." Encouraged by our meetings with constituency representatives, with the Board and the CEO, the 2013 NomCom decided to make a clean distinction between our processes, which should be as transparent as possible, and information about the candidates, which shall remain absolutely confidential. I hope that this change will be noticed by the community. We'll keep on reporting, and we'll have an open session in Beijing." Both Waudo and I are pleased to report that the Committee has begun its mandate with a strong sense of mutual respect and camaraderie; fully united in its mission. I have also attached the 2013 Nom Com Timeline of activities and the Open Positions that we will be working toward filling. Soon, we will send an announcement to the BC list explaining the nature of the candidates we are looking for and the process for applying. We encourage you, however, to start thinking now about whom you know that would be a potential candidate to add to the pool. Our next Report Card will be forthcoming immediately following our meeting in mid-November. Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff President RNA Partners, Inc. 220 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10001 + 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11 <2013 Open Leadership Positions r2.pdf><NomCom Report Card Oct 2012 Final r1.pdf><2013 NomCom timetable.ppt>

1 0