November 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

BC Members call: Friday, Nov. 30, 2012 at 11 am EST (4 pm UTC)
by Benedetta Rossi Nov. 30, 2012

Nov. 30, 2012

Dear BC Members, Please save the date for the upcoming BC members call taking place on *Friday, Nov. 30, 2012 at 11 am EST (4 pm UTC / 3 pm CET) for 90 minutes. * The agenda for the call is attached, as well as relevant materials for the call. Dial in details and calendar invitation will follow as soon as possible. Please let me know if you need a dial out. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

2 2

.Com prices frozen at $7.85 absent Extraordinary Circumstances
by Phil Corwin Nov. 30, 2012

Nov. 30, 2012

https://investor.verisign.com/releaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=724216 http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2012/department-commerce-approves-ver… 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 Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

1 0

FW: Breaking: Verisign To Hold Conference Call & Live Webcast Friday Morning At 8:30 AM On Status of .Com Contract
by Phil Corwin Nov. 29, 2012

Nov. 29, 2012

FYI http://www.thedomains.com/2012/11/29/breaking-verisign-to-hold-conference-l… Breaking: Verisign To Hold Conference Call & Live Webcast Friday Morning At 8:30 AM On Status of .Com Contract 2012 November 29 by Michael Berkens Verisign ( NASDAQ : VRSN )just announced they will be holding a conference call and Live Webcast tomorrow morning, Friday November 30, 2012 at 8:30 AM EST: "to provide a status update on the .com Registry Agreement renewal". "The call will be accessible by direct dial at (888) 676-VRSN (U.S.) or (913) 312-0400 (international)." A listen-only live webcast of the conference call will also be available at http://investor.verisign.com<http://ctt.marketwire.com/?release=960074&id=2335801&type=1&url=http%3a%2f%…>. November 30th is the date previously set by Verisign as the deadline for a determination on the .Com contract without requiring an extension from the DOC. Shares of Verisign traded down almost 2% today to close at $39.31 and where trading down another 1% after hours but shares appear to have stopped trading. We of course will be watching the webcast to see if they got the .com contract renewed and if so at what rate and with what guaranteed increase, if any. As we reported<http://www.thedomains.com/2012/11/26/ica-tells-dept-of-commerce-to-make-ver…>, the Internet Commerce Association (ICA) wrote a lengthily letter to the to the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), urging the DOC & the DOJ not to approve the renewal of the Verisign contract to operate the .com registry unless Verisign rolls back wholesale prices of .com domain names to the same price it charges for .net domain registrations and to limit price increases in the future to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). 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 Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2634/5426 - Release Date: 11/29/12

1 0

Report card on BC/IPC improvements in Rights Protection Mechanisms for new gTLDs
by Steve DelBianco Nov. 29, 2012

Nov. 29, 2012

BC Members — in advance of our member call tomorrow, here's a "report card" on the eight RPM improvements we suggested in Toronto. (attached) The report card includes links to Fadi's blogs on "Strawman" proposals. Below the report card are my notes from Fadi's call on 26-Nov. This doc also includes the latest proposal from BC/IPC on how to implement "blocking" thru a Limited Preventative Registration mechanism (LPR). Look forward to the discussion tomorrow, when BC members who were engaged in the discussion can explain further: Marilyn Cade Elisa Cooper Bryce Coughlin Martin Sutton Susan Kawaguchi Fred Felman Sarah Deutsch -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

2 1

ALERTS from the Secretariat: Announcements & Open Public Comments
by Benedetta Rossi Nov. 29, 2012

Nov. 29, 2012

Dear BC Members, Please find attached two useful documents: 1. Open public comments, updated as of today (Nov. 29, 2012) 2. List of recent ICANN announcements for the month of November Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

Announcement of new VPs /Stakeholder
by Marilyn Cade Nov. 29, 2012

Nov. 29, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-28nov12-en.htm Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

1 0

FW: Fadi's blog /Follow up to TMCH working sessions in LA
by Marilyn Cade Nov. 27, 2012

Nov. 27, 2012

Dear BC membersPlease see Fadi Chehade's blog conveying his approach for the 'way forward' for the strawman solution developed during the LA meeting. This included participation by Marilyn Cade, Fred Felman [substituting for Elisa Cooper who represented BC in Brussels]; Bryce Coughlin, Gerald Depardo; and Steve DelBianco. Martin Sutton was invited as a .brand representative and was also at the meeting in LA. The ExComm will meet today and discuss the status and possible approaches. We have a full members call on Friday and look forward to a fuller discussion at that time regarding practicalities and approaches to improvements to the Guidebook in the RPMs. After this work is concluded, Fadi will focus on RAA and URS, also key issues to the BC's members. Marilyn Cade, BC Chair --------------------------------------------------- http://blog.icann.org/2012/11/a-follow-up-to-our-trademark-clearinghouse-me… A Follow-Up to Our Trademark Clearinghouse Meetings by Fadi Chehadé on November 26, 2012 To wrap up the series of meetings ICANN convened with stakeholders to find common ground on Trademark Clearinghouse implementation, we conducted a follow-up briefing today for the group who worked on these issues during our meetings in Brussels and Los Angeles. We discussed two items: 1. An update on the Trademark Clearinghouse contract, and 2. A way forward on the strawman solution developed during the meeting in Los Angeles. Contracts ICANN has continued to negotiate the agreements for database services with IBM and for validation services with Deloitte to include additional terms that will provide ICANN with maximum operational flexibility and guaranteed stewardship of the trademark database. Here is an overview: ICANN retains all intellectual property rights in the Trademark Clearinghouse data. Deloitte’s validation services are to be non-exclusive. ICANN may add additional validators after a threshold of minimum stability is met. Trademark submission fees are capped at USD 150 per record. Discounts are available for bulk & multi-year submissions. IBM will charge Deloitte for database access via an application processing interface (API), and will charge registries and registrars for real-time access to the database during the sunrise and claims periods. ICANN may audit Deloitte’s performance (and revenues/costs) to confirm that the costs and fees for validation services are reasonable.We are moving to sign agreements as soon as possible and the agreements will be posted once signed. The "Strawman Solution" As promised, we reviewed each of the elements of the strawman solution to identify a way forward, paying special attention to determining whether each properly belonged in a policy or implementation process. We did not find that any element of the strawman was inconsistent with the policy advice from GNSO recommendation 3: Strings must not infringe the existing legal rights of others that are recognized or enforceable under generally accepted and internationally recognized principles of law. However, the analysis of the various elements yielded different recommended steps for consideration, as described below. Sunrise Notice Requirement. Our analysis is that the addition of the required 30-day notice period for Sunrise falls clearly into the realm of implementation. The policy advice did not recommend specific time periods, and this is a reasonable means to help address the communications concerns of rights holders, especially in light of the high volume of gTLD applications. Trademark Claims. The extension of Trademark Claims from 60 to 90 days can also be considered implementation, as it is a matter of continuing a service that is already required. The addition of a “Claims 2” process could also fall into the category of implementation given that it is an optional, fee-based service for rights holders, and is more lightweight than what registries and registrars will have implemented in the Trademark Claims 1 period. This service is envisioned to benefit both consumers and trademark holders, and is consistent with the objectives of the Trademark Claims service developed by the community. To the extent that there are additional costs incurred by registries and registrars, I envision that these fees can be offset when the process is implemented, as a portion of the fees to be collected by IBM for this voluntary service are to be shared with registries and registrars. Scope of Trademark Claims. The inclusion of strings previously found to be abusively registered in the Clearinghouse for purposes of Trademark Claims can be considered implementation, as it provides a path for associating a limited number of additional domain names with a trademark record. This is consistent with the policy advice that trademark rights should be protected, and, given that the inclusion of such names would be only on the basis of a decision rendered under the UDRP or a court proceeding, the process would merely take into account names for which the issues have already been balanced and considered. However, given the previous intensive discussions on the scope of protections associated with a Clearinghouse record, involving the IRT/STI, we believe this needs guidance from the GNSO Council.I will be sending a message to the GNSO Council asking it for guidance on the Scope of Trademark Claims. In addition, the strawman model will be posted this week for public comment. I am also including, along with the strawman model, a revised proposal from the BC/IPC for limited preventative registrations designed to address the need for second-level defensive registrations. Although this proposal is not currently part of the strawman model, I will be seeking guidance from the GNSO Council on this proposal as well. As a reminder, the strawman model was developed by participants selected by the respective stakeholder groups in the GNSO. I thank them for working with me to explore a balanced set of improvements to the TMCH and the rights protection mechanisms available for new gTLDs. I plan to convene this group one last time to discuss the outcome of planned contractual talks with IBM. I hope for this to happen later this week or next week. Sincerely, Fadi

1 0

Internet eco System/WCIT
by Marilyn Cade Nov. 27, 2012

Nov. 27, 2012

Dear BC members While we are tremendously busy @ICANN, there is also a lot going on in the Internet Eco System front that has implications for ICANN. Many of you attended, or participated in the workshops at ICANN on ICANN and the Internet Eco System. I saw this recently, and thought it might be a useful backgrounder and status update. The ITU Treaty conference begins on 1/3 and concludes essentially for negotiations on 1/14, with formal publication on 1/15. It is too complex and not useful to dwell on the substance, however, as this topic has been of concern to many BC members, I am providing a link to a recent Forbes article. This is provided as a background document. I know that many of the BC companies, in their individual capacity, are actively attending or following the ITU WCIT. This posting is not to create a BC debate, but to inform other members that many of your colleagues in the BC are contributing to activities or initiatives that support ICANN's role and core mission. Technically, the WCIT should not be about ICANN but certain states are proposing changes in the ITU Treaty on Telecommunications Regulations that have implications for the Internet. We have a tremendous number of hot items at ICANN, but during December, the world will be watching Dubai and this conference. If you want to post something on the BC list on this topic, please use a subject line of Internet Eco System/WCIT, so that members not interested, can ignore and focus on other ICANN related topics. Marilyn Cade http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrydownes/2012/11/26/un-agencys-leaked-playbo…

1 0

RE: [bc-gnso] BC Members call: Friday, Nov. 30, 2012 at 11 am EST (4 pm UTC)
by john＠crediblecontext.com Nov. 23, 2012

Nov. 23, 2012

1 0

ICANN Board Addresses WHOIS
by Marilyn Cade Nov. 19, 2012

Nov. 19, 2012

PLEASE NOTE THE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM ICANN BOARD. I will be announcing further details on the Experts Group, as they are provided to Chairs by ICANN staff. Your comments are invited to bc-gnso list. Marilyn Cade, BC Chair ICANN Board Addresses WHOIS 19 November 2012 For Immediate Release ICANN Board Launches New Effort to Tackle gTLD Registration Data Challenges Based on Policy Review Team Report Approved resolution also reconfirms full support for Enforcement of WHOIS policy and obligations Los Angeles, California… The ICANN Board of Directors has directed the Chief Executive Officer to launch a new effort to re-examine the purpose of collecting, maintaining and providing access to generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) registration data. The move follows the recommendations of a review team that examined implementation of WHOIS data policy. WHOIS is a listing of domain registrants and their contact information. “WHOIS began more than 25 years ago, before there was even a World Wide Web and its purpose was far more technical than it is today,” said Dr. Stephen D. Crocker, ICANN Board Chair. “It’s clear that we have to take a thorough look at WHOIS from the ground up, and that’s what we’re asking the CEO to do - what should WHOIS be and how can we best improve its accuracy?” The Board tasked the CEO to go beyond the existing WHOIS protocol and start a new initiative focused on directory services. In response CEO Fadi Chehadé will convene an expert working group to help lay the foundation for new policy development work. The Board resolution also directs the CEO to continue to fully enforce the contractual conditions that relate to the current collection, access and accuracy of gTLD registration data, and increase efforts to communicate and conduct outreach ensuring compliance with existing WHOIS policy and conditions. “It’s basically a two-track approach,” said Crocker. “In addition to a full examination of WHOIS, the Board wants to make certain that enforcement of existing WHOIS reporting requirements is strengthened in conformance with the Affirmation of Commitments and the recommendations of the WHOIS Review Team.” The Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) is an agreement signed by ICANN and the U.S. Department of Commerce in 2009 that, among other things, commits ICANN to enforcing existing policies relating to WHOIS. ## To read the Board resolution on WHOIS, go here: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-08nov12-en.htm#1 To read the report of the WHOIS Policy Review Team, go here: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/briefing-materials-1-08nov12… MEDIA CONTACTS: Brad White Director of Global Media Affairs Washington, DC, USA Tel. +1 202.570.7118 brad.white(a)icann.org Andrew Robertson Edelman Public Relations London, U.K. Tel. + 44 (7811) 341 945 andrew.Robertson(a)edelman.com About ICANN: ICANN’s mission is to ensure a stable, secure and unified global Internet. To reach another person on the Internet you have to type an address into your computer - a name or a number. That address has to be unique so computers know where to find each other. ICANN coordinates these unique identifiers across the world. Without that coordination we wouldn't have one global Internet. ICANN was formed in 1998. It is a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with participants from all over the world dedicated to keeping the Internet secure, stable and interoperable. It promotes competition and develops policy on the Internet’s unique identifiers. ICANN doesn’t control content on the Internet. It cannot stop spam and it doesn’t deal with access to the Internet. But through its coordination role of the Internet’s naming system, it does have an important impact on the expansion and evolution of the Internet. For more information please visit: www.icann.org. If you would rather not receive future communications from ICANN, let us know by clicking here. ICANN, 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90094 United States _______________________________________________ soac-infoalert mailing list soac-infoalert(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-infoalert

2 2

FW: Congressional Internet Caucus Co-Chairs Support Ambassador Kramer's delegation to the WCIT
by Phil Corwin Nov. 19, 2012

Nov. 19, 2012

FYI 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 Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: ICAC(a)netcaucus.org [mailto:ICAC@netcaucus.org] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:39 PM To: Phil Corwin Subject: Congressional Internet Caucus Co-Chairs Support Ambassador Kramer's delegation to the WCIT [https://netforum.avectra.com/public/EmailTrack.aspx?cli=IEF&img=7a4c525d-7e…] Congressional Internet Caucus Co-Chairs Bolster U.S. Delegation's WCIT Position Bipartisan Congressional support critical as details leak about ITU Internet control plan WASHINGTON, DC - The Congressional Internet Caucus<http://www.netcaucus.org/members/> co-chairs predicted "dire consequences" should "unaccountable international entities" usurp control of Internet functions in a letter<http://www.netcaucus.org/events/2012/internetgovernance/Internet-Caucus-WCI…> to Ambassador Terry Kramer in advance of the World Conference on International Communications (WCIT). Over the weekend, more details leaked about the impending WCIT power struggles that Ambassador Gross faces as the U.S. delegation heads to Dubai. The co-chairs urged Ambassador Kramer to take a strong stand, noting "our cherished notions of free speech would be chilled on the global platform leading to a balkanization of the Internet where censorship could become the new norm." In the letter<http://www.netcaucus.org/events/2012/internetgovernance/Internet-Caucus-WCI…>, all four Congressional Internet Caucus co-chairs -- Senator Patrick Leahy, Senator John Thune, Representative Bob Goodlatte and Representative Anna G. Eshoo -- stated "Internet governance issues can best be addressed through [current] multi-stakeholder mechanisms" rather than "unaccountable intergovernmental agencies." Leading U.S. stakeholders alerted Congress to the impending ITU takeover in the spring at a Congressional briefing<http://www.netcaucus.org/events/2012/internetgovernance/> hosted by the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee<http://www.netcaucus.org/>. The strong statement from the bicameral, bipartisan caucus bolsters the U.S. delegation's mission to ensure that Internet governance functions remain with "the private, nonprofit, and governmental organizations that have managed the Internet effectively for many years and empowered it to flourish." Link to letter: http://bit.ly/ROU4W4 Contact: Eric Hinkes ehinkes(a)netcaucus.org<mailto:ehinkes@netcaucus.org?subject=Advisory%20Committee%20Membership> (202) 638-4370 x127 Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee 1634 I Street NW - Washington, DC 20006 www.NetCaucus.org<http://www.NetCaucus.org> Find us on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/cicac>, Twitter<http://twitter.com/#!/netcaucusac>, Google+<https://plus.google.com/103498997342005618277/> and LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Congressional-Internet-Caucus-Advisory-Commi…> This e-mail was sent from Internet Education Foundation (ICAC(a)netcaucus.org<mailto:ICAC@netcaucus.org>) to psc(a)vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>. [https://netforum.avectra.com/public/EmailTrack.aspx?msm=924d3899-0767-4ccd-…] To unsubscribe, please click on this link and follow the instructions: Unsubscribe<https://netforum.avectra.com/public/EmailUnsubscribe.aspx?msm=924d3899-0767…> Internet Education Foundation,1634 I Street NW Suite 1101 Washington DC 20006, Phone Number:202-638-4370 ext. 319, Fax Number: , Email Address: cmatsuda(a)neted.org<mailto:cmatsuda@neted.org>, Website : http://www.neted.org/ ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5405 - Release Date: 11/19/12

1 0

FILED: Business Constituency comment on ICANN meetings proposal
by Steve DelBianco Nov. 16, 2012

Nov. 16, 2012

Today the BC filed initial comments & recommendations on ICANN's proposal (link<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/meetings-proposal-2012-02oct12-…>) for consolidated meetings. (see our comments below) During the Reply Comment period thru 7-Dec, we plan to elaborate on our recommendations, based on suggestions from Marilyn Cade and Chris Chaplow. We will circulate a draft for BC member review. --Steve Date: Friday, November 16, 2012 8:00 PM To: "meetings-proposal-2012(a)icann.org<mailto:meetings-proposal-2012@icann.org>" <meetings-proposal-2012(a)icann.org<mailto:meetings-proposal-2012@icann.org>> Subject: Business Constituency comment on ICANN meetings proposal The Business Constituency offers these recommendations and comments on ICANN's proposal for consolidated meetings. (a) There should be a continuous meetings evaluation process. ICANN public meetings are now large and expensive undertakings - over $2 million for ICANN, and undoubtedly more than that for participant travel and accommodation costs. The number, timing and scope of public meetings should be carefully reviewed to make best use of scarce resources. As ICANN changes, so should the meetings adjust to new circumstances. (b) Consistent with its commitment to openness and transparency, ICANN should place a high priority on selecting host country sites with minimal visa requirements and favorable travel costs for participants from developing nations. (c) Proposed contracts with venues and hotels should include a substantial discount from standard rates, and these discounts should be available to all attendees. (d) The Internet infrastructure of meeting sites must be more than "adequate." ICANN should continue to foster investment in Internet facilities everywhere, and should reward hosts who demonstrate their commitment to the network by providing superior access and bandwidth. (e) The BC suggests that the next step is for the staff to complete an evaluation matrix for the proposed future sites, identifying key selection factors, and post this information for additional public comment. Mike Roberts served as Rapportuer for these comments, which were approved in accordance with the BC Charter.

1 0

FW: Sandy Scams Webpost
by Phil Corwin Nov. 12, 2012

Nov. 12, 2012

FYI, this was just posted at the ICA website... http://internetcommerce.org/Sandy_Scams Sickening Sandy Domain Scams Lives were tragically lost in Hurricane Sandy, with many additional victims sustaining acute physical injuries. Power remains out in many storm-affected areas as temperatures skew colder. Thousands of homes have been destroyed or badly damaged, and businesses have been shuttered and laid off workers, as public officials scramble to find adequate alternative shelter for the homeless and coordinate relief efforts. The rebuilding effort will take months, and in some cases years. And yet, as with far too many natural disasters, a small group of insensitive individuals have sought to make personal profit out of human tragedy, with some going so far as engaging in criminal fraud to divert charitable contributions away from their intended recipients. Unfortunately, some of these scams involve domain registration and use abuse, and aside from being dead wrong and illegal they carry the risk of giving all legitimate domain investors a bad name through mistaken guilt-by-association. CNN recently ran a news feature casting a spotlight on these Sandy-associated scams -- Charity scams claim to aid Sandy victims<http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/10/charity-scams-claim-to-aid-sandy-vict…> . ICA condemns these despicable actions. Our Code of Conduct - http://internetcommerce.org/member_code_of_conduct -- adopted shortly after the Association's founding six years ago, clearly states that, "A registrant should not intentionally register a domain name related to a current or historical event involving human suffering or tragedy where the primary purpose of such registration is commercial profit." Our COC also calls on domain registrants to "provide accurate domain name ownership and contact information to the WHOIS database in a timely manner so that domain name ownership is transparent" and also declares, "A registrant's usage of domain names shall follow applicable laws and regulations and a registrant shall not use domain names for unlawful purposes." Phony "pop-up charities" fail all these standards, especially the test of legality. Of course, condemning bad acts is easier than stopping them. It amazes us that individuals will make charitable gifts based solely upon receipt of an unsolicited e-mail or happening across a website for an unfamiliar "charity", yet the Better Business Bureau (BBB) estimates that more than two-thirds of charitable contributors don't bother to check out a recipient charity's bona fides. The first step in any anti-scam effort has to be greater public education and awareness so that those with the noble intent of aiding victims don't become victims themselves. BBB's Wise Giving Alliance -- http://www.bbb.org/us/Wise-Giving/ -- provides guidance for individuals wanting to make that check, and also sets high standards for organizations that seek public contributions. Public education, while necessary, is insufficient. A few high-profile law enforcement prosecutions of fake charity scammers might have laudable deterrent impact - although that's not a simple task, as scammers can be located anywhere on the globe. VISA, MasterCard, PayPal, and other major payment processors also have a role to play, as these scams all rely on credit and debit charges for their ill-gotten gains. And perhaps leading domain registrars, in conjunction with ICANN's Registrar Stakeholder Group, could focus some attention on the problem and see if there are reasonable means by which suspicious domain registrations made in the days leading up to a natural disaster or its immediate aftermath can receive extra scrutiny. People have all sorts of reasons for registering name-related domains, so it would be difficult to impossible to give heightened scrutiny to all domain registrations that incorporate the official storm names released by the National Hurricane Center years in advance (http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutnames.shtml) But surely registrations of Sandy-related domains made in the few days leading up to and after landfall should have invited raised eyebrows. ICA would be happy to engage in any discussion of how the broad domain-related community can best address these scams - natural disasters are inevitable, but disaster-related scams are unacceptable. For those in the domain community wishing to provide legitimate aid to Sandy's victims, one option is the special Sandy campaign designated by the NY Time's Neediest Cases Fund, which distributes contributions among ten legitimate social services agencies operating through the storm-affected area (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/nyregion/special-campaign-is-established-…) The American Red Cross has taken a lead role in providing assistance to Sandy's victims and is a worthy recipient (http://newsroom.redcross.org/category/disaster-relief-operation/hurricane-s…) And CNN provides this guidance on how to target Sandy relief through listed charitable organizations to both US victims and those in the Caribbean who were ravaged by the storm before it slammed into the East Coast (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/30/us/iyw-how-to-help-after-sandy/index.html) These are by no means the only giving options, as any quick Internet search will reveal. But whatever means of giving you may select, take a few minutes to be sure that your charity of choice is bona fide - in that regard, the BBB provides this list of Dos and Don'ts to make sure that dollars meant for victims don't line the pockets of fake charity scam artists (http://www.bbb.org/blog/2012/11/will-sandy-bring-a-hurricane-of-charitable-…) Let's all do what we can to make sure that aid intended for Sandy's victims reaches them, and to find better means to reduce disaster-related Internet scams in the future. 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 Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

1 0

ICANN's Nom Com invites Statements of Interest and candidate recommendations
by Ron Andruff Nov. 8, 2012

Nov. 8, 2012

Dear colleagues, ICANN's Nominating Committee (NomCom) invites Statements of Interest and candidate recommendations from the Internet community for key leadership positions to fulfill ICANN's technical and policy coordination role. Interested individuals are invited to submit a Statement of Interest to the 2013 NomCom for the following positions: * Three members of the Board of Directors of ICANN * Three At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) representatives (one each from the Africa, Asia/Australia/Pacific Islands and Latin America/Caribbean Islands regions) * Two members of the Council of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) * One member of the Council of the Country-Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Here are the links to the Nom Com site (http://nomcom.icann.org <http://nomcom.icann.org/> ) and information for Statements of Interest and Suggestions for Candidates (http://nomcom.icann.org/invitation-2013.htm ). The Nom Com welcomes all candidates and suggestions for candidates. Please note that the Statements of Interest must be received before 1 May 2012 (23:59 UTC), and the selection of final selectees will be announced in early September 2013. Thank you all for your consideration. Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc.

1 0

workshop at IGF, on human rights in policy development at ICANN
by Steve DelBianco Nov. 8, 2012

Nov. 8, 2012

This afternoon the IGF will have a workshop on ICANN's policy development process. It's been organized by NCSG members who would like ICANN to more formally consider "human rights" in PDPs. Panelists: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Wendy Seltzer - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Franklin Netto - ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee - Govt - GRULAC - Confirmed Avri Doria - DotGay Application Advisory Group (dAAG) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Hong Xue - Institute of the Internet Policy & Law at Beijing Normal University (BNU) - Academy - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Kuo-Wei Wu - ICANN Board - Civil Society - Asia Pacific - Confirmed We saw this initiative in Toronto, regarding the Thick WHOIS PDP. Several BC members here in Baku will attend and intervene when appropriate. --Steve (No.123) Human Rights, Internet Policy and the Public Policy Role of ICANN The recent years have proven that the openness of Internet is a fundamental feature for the empowerment of citizens and the strengthening of democracies. The framing of Internet policy should be oriented towards this goal and the policies governing the Domain Name System are not a stranger to this debate. On one hand, a human rights assessment on new ICANN policies could provide the community with means to better understand the impacts of the introduction of new policies in the ICANN environment, in addition to economic analyses. On the other, new regulation is being proposed in numerous countries using the DNS system as a resource to prevent or stop illicit activities. The fine balance between law enforcement and the protection of human rights, such as free speech and privacy, among others, is crucial for a number of new Internet regulations that affects the DNS. For example there are tensions between the potential benefits of aggregating specific forms of content for communities of people to support their right to information, and the ease of DNS filtering to further censor or narrow the spaces for expression and information of already marginalised/discriminated against sections of society, for example, the introduction of dotgay. Especially at ICANN, free speech concerns over the implementation of new generic top level domains and the traditional debate over privacy and the WHOIS highlights the need for a more concrete analysis on the impact on human rights on ICANN activities. However, ICANN is not a human rights standard setting body yet is responsible for public policy making, although in a very narrow sphere. The role and responsibility of ICANN in relation to human rights needs further exploration and multi-stakeholder dialogue to better understand how to give effect to human rights related issues within ICANN. The proposed workshop will provide a comprehensive analysis of internet policy topics handled by ICANN that have human rights implications and examine how these implications are paramount to the fostering of the public interest in internet policy. @@@@@@@@@@ Agenda for Workshop no.123: Human Rights, Internet Policy and the Public Policy Role of ICANN 10 minutes – Introductions * Moderator: Framing the questions and setting the stage for the debates *Each panelist: 2 line introductions from each panelist – their name, affiliation and why they think the issue is important 60 minutes – What are the most relevant topics regarding human rights protection on the development of the public policy role of ICANN? * Panelists have 5 (five) minutes to present their remarks, followed by 35 (thirty five) minutes of audience discussion 40 minutes – How to implement a human rights assessment on ICANN policies? * Panelists have 2 (two) minutes to present remarks followed by 30 (thirty) minutes of audience discussion 10 minutes – Wrap up and way forward *Each panelist: 1 minute takeaways *Moderator: overall summary Organiser(s) Name: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG Carlos Affonso Souza - Center for Technology and Society at Getulio Vargas Foundation Law School (CTS/FGV) - Academia - GRULAC Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG Submitted Workshop Panelists: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Wendy Seltzer - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Franklin Netto - ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee - Govt - GRULAC - Confirmed Avri Doria - DotGay Application Advisory Group (dAAG) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Hong Xue - Institute of the Internet Policy & Law at Beijing Normal University (BNU) - Academy - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Kuo-Wei Wu - ICANN Board - Civil Society - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Name of Remote Moderator(s): Carlos Affonso Souza - CTS/FGV

3 3

Re: [bc-gnso] workshop at IGF, on human rights in policy development at ICANN
by Marilyn Cade Nov. 8, 2012

Nov. 8, 2012

I am in the Enhanced Cooperation /European session. Steve, I asked Anders to come in as well. Can you catch up w him that you are there? He is not online at all. It is interesting there is no technical, business participant - so not presenting all views. Steve, NOT suggesting this is relevant for interventions themselves, but I am not sure this fits the requirement of "reflecting all views", in the panelists. Who from BC is in the room w you? This session is going along... AT&T, Disney, ICANN, Jimson and I are here... CS is all w you! Except Bill Drake.. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Gabriela Szlak <gabrielaszlak(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:36:55 To: <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org> Cc: <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] workshop at IGF, on human rights in policy development at ICANN Sorry, the link to the workshop is this: http://webcast.igf2012.com/#room1 2012/11/8 Gabriela Szlak <gabrielaszlak(a)gmail.com <mailto:gabrielaszlak@gmail.com> > Thanks Steve, and here?s a quick link to follow the workshop online: http://webcast.igf2012.com/#room8 G. 2012/11/8 Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org <mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org> > This afternoon the IGF will have a workshop on ICANN's policy development process. It's been organized by NCSG members who would like ICANN to more formally consider "human rights" in PDPs. Panelists: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Wendy Seltzer - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Franklin Netto - ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee - Govt - GRULAC - Confirmed Avri Doria - DotGay Application Advisory Group (dAAG) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Hong Xue - Institute of the Internet Policy & Law at Beijing Normal University (BNU) - Academy - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Kuo-Wei Wu - ICANN Board - Civil Society - Asia Pacific - Confirmed We saw this initiative in Toronto, regarding the Thick WHOIS PDP. Several BC members here in Baku will attend and intervene when appropriate. --Steve (No.123) Human Rights, Internet Policy and the Public Policy Role of ICANN The recent years have proven that the openness of Internet is a fundamental feature for the empowerment of citizens and the strengthening of democracies. The framing of Internet policy should be oriented towards this goal and the policies governing the Domain Name System are not a stranger to this debate. On one hand, a human rights assessment on new ICANN policies could provide the community with means to better understand the impacts of the introduction of new policies in the ICANN environment, in addition to economic analyses. On the other, new regulation is being proposed in numerous countries using the DNS system as a resource to prevent or stop illicit activities. The fine balance between law enforcement and the protection of human rights, such as free speech and privacy, among others, is crucial for a number of new Internet regulations that affects the DNS. For example there are tensions between the potential benefits of aggregating specific forms of content for communities of people to support their right to information, and the ease of DNS filtering to further censor or narrow the spaces for expression and information of already marginalised/discriminated against sections of society, for example, the introduction of dotgay. Especially at ICANN, free speech concerns over the implementation of new generic top level domains and the traditional debate over privacy and the WHOIS highlights the need for a more concrete analysis on the impact on human rights on ICANN activities. However, ICANN is not a human rights standard setting body yet is responsible for public policy making, although in a very narrow sphere. The role and responsibility of ICANN in relation to human rights needs further exploration and multi-stakeholder dialogue to better understand how to give effect to human rights related issues within ICANN. The proposed workshop will provide a comprehensive analysis of internet policy topics handled by ICANN that have human rights implications and examine how these implications are paramount to the fostering of the public interest in internet policy. @@@@@@@@@@ Agenda for Workshop no.123: Human Rights, Internet Policy and the Public Policy Role of ICANN 10 minutes - Introductions * Moderator: Framing the questions and setting the stage for the debates *Each panelist: 2 line introductions from each panelist - their name, affiliation and why they think the issue is important 60 minutes - What are the most relevant topics regarding human rights protection on the development of the public policy role of ICANN? * Panelists have 5 (five) minutes to present their remarks, followed by 35 (thirty five) minutes of audience discussion 40 minutes - How to implement a human rights assessment on ICANN policies? * Panelists have 2 (two) minutes to present remarks followed by 30 (thirty) minutes of audience discussion 10 minutes - Wrap up and way forward *Each panelist: 1 minute takeaways *Moderator: overall summary Organiser(s) Name: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG Carlos Affonso Souza - Center for Technology and Society at Getulio Vargas Foundation Law School (CTS/FGV) - Academia - GRULAC Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG Submitted Workshop Panelists: Joy Liddicoat - Association for Progressive Communications (APC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Wendy Seltzer - Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Franklin Netto - ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee - Govt - GRULAC - Confirmed Avri Doria - DotGay Application Advisory Group (dAAG) - Civil Society - WEOG - Confirmed Hong Xue - Institute of the Internet Policy & Law at Beijing Normal University (BNU) - Academy - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Kuo-Wei Wu - ICANN Board - Civil Society - Asia Pacific - Confirmed Name of Remote Moderator(s): Carlos Affonso Souza - CTS/FGV -- <https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/photos/img/photos/private/AIbEiAIAAABECLyw…> Dra. Gabriela Szlak Abogada & Mediadora Consultora en Derecho y Nuevas Tecnologías Estudio Rosz Avenida Roque Saenz Peña 943, Piso 6° 62, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina (005411) 4328-0231 / 4393-7508 www.estudiorosz.com.ar <http://www.estudiorosz.com.ar/> www.gabrielaszlak.com.ar <http://www.gabrielaszlak.com.ar/> Skype: gabrielaszlak Twitter: @GabiSzlak La información contenida en este e-mail es confidencial. The information in this e-mail is confidential. -- <https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/photos/img/photos/private/AIbEiAIAAABECLyw…> Dra. Gabriela Szlak Abogada & Mediadora Consultora en Derecho y Nuevas Tecnologías Estudio Rosz Avenida Roque Saenz Peña 943, Piso 6° 62, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina (005411) 4328-0231 / 4393-7508 www.estudiorosz.com.ar <http://www.estudiorosz.com.ar/> www.gabrielaszlak.com.ar <http://www.gabrielaszlak.com.ar/> Skype: gabrielaszlak Twitter: @GabiSzlak La información contenida en este e-mail es confidencial. The information in this e-mail is confidential.

1 0

FILED: Business Constituency comment on ICANN's proposed rules for TM Matching
by Steve DelBianco Nov. 8, 2012

Nov. 8, 2012

Just a note to let you know that we filed BC comments on the matching rules for TM Clearinghouse. (see below and here<http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-docs-sep12/msg00013.html>) The draft comment was circulated to BC membership on 17-Oct and no edits or objections were recorded in the 14-day review period. Steve DelBianco Vice chair for policy coordination Business Constituency The Business Constituency offers this suggestion on ICANN's proposed matching rules for names entered in the Trademark Clearinghouse. 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. Elisa Cooper served as Rapportuer for these comments, which were approved in accordance with the BC Charter.

1 0