April 2013 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

BC comment on singular plural
by Steve DelBianco 16 Aug '13

16 Aug '13

Here's what we just told the Board at the Public Forum, on behalf of the BC ICANN’s String Similarity Panel was to place into contention sets any strings that create a possibility of user confusion. But in late February ICANN published contention sets that did NOT include 24 pairs of singular-plural forms of the same string (English and Spanish) Sport(s) Loan(s) Web(s) Game(s) Hotel(es) Risks of allowing both singular and plural TLDs for the same word are well understood. -confusion -precedent for the next round -ICANN looking pretty ridiculous What’s not understood is how it happened and what we can do about it. First response is to ask if the panelist follow GNSO Policy on confusingly similar. Second response is “Chong” ( Chinese for “Do-over” ) -Do-over on just these 24 pairs - WIPO Mediation Rules, Article 1 says, “Words used in the singular include the plural and vice versa, as the context may require.” Guess we could correct the Guidebook (plurals are confusingly similar) String Confusion Objections on 7 of these pairs are in the hands of the ICDR rightnow. If ICSR does the right thing and finds these pairs should be contention sets, The Board can apply this rule to ALL 24 pairs Failing that, there’s Formal Reconsideration. We all worry about threat from inter-governmental groups just waiting for ICANN to stumble. We have enough vulnerability to stumble with so many unknowns in the new gTLD launch. No need to add to our vulnerability with this self-inflicted wound

13 34

FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on ICANN's proposed rules for TM Matching
by Steve DelBianco 30 May '13

30 May '13

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

ICANN Nominating Committee Extends Deadline for Statements of Interest to 15 May 2013
by Ron Andruff 30 Apr '13

30 Apr '13

Dear Colleagues, Please note that the Nom Com have extended the deadline for Statements of Interest by two weeks. If you have an interest or know of qualified individuals, please take action or pass this along. The announcement is here: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30apr13-en.htm Kind regards, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc. <http://www.rnapartners.com>

1 0

Also for discussion of BC comment on RAA
by Hansen, Anjali 29 Apr '13

29 Apr '13

All, I volunteered to draft comments for the BC on the proposed revisions to the RAA. As Steve noted, ICANN recently released an updated version of the RAA, which may address some of the BC members' prior concerns. See ICANN's issues memo (attached) on the latest revisions as a summary. If any of you have had the chance to look at the latest version and can provide input today at our meeting, that would be great. However, comments are now not due until May 13, so I would welcome your written comments by next Thursday. I can then circulate a draft of the comments to everyone by end of next week. There are a lot of specifications that need to be looked at as well. Here is the link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-22apr13-en.htm I had no idea what I was taking on when I volunteered for this project! I will be greatly relying on everyone's input. Thank you and talk with you soon, Anjali Anjali Karina Hansen Deputy General Counsel Tel: 703-247-9340 Fax: 703-276-0634 Email: ahansen(a)council.bbb.org<mailto:ahansen@council.bbb.org> bbb.org<http://www.bbb.org/> Start With Trust(r) Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc. 3033 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 600 Arlington, VA 22201 For consumer tips, scams and alerts: Read our blog <http://www.bbb.org/blog/>Find us on: Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/bbb_us> | Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Better-Business-Bureau-US/25368131403> | LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=1917928&trk=anet_ug_grppro> | YouTube<http://www.youtube.com/user/BBBconsumerTips> | Flickr<http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbb_us> This message is a private communication, and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify the sender by reply email and then delete the message from your system without printing, copying or forwarding it. Thank you. From: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve DelBianco Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 9:53 AM To: 'bc - GNSO list' Subject: [bc-gnso] for discussion of BC comment on GAC Advice for new gTLDs This is for discussion during today's BC Member call, during the Policy segment of the agenda. Background for BC comments on Beijing GAC Advice Full GAC Communique and Advice from Beijing here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/gac-to-board-18apr13-en.pdf>. Initial public comments due 14-May 1. New gTLDs: a. GAC objections to specific applications (. africa . gcc . islam . halal) b. Safeguards for new gTLDs (Annex 1) Safeguards for all new gTLDs 1. Registry does Whois verification checks 2x per year 2. Registrant ToS should prohibit malware, botnets, phishing, piracy, TM/copyright infringement, fraud, deception, or anything contrary to applicable law. 3. Registry to periodically check domains in TLD for security threats (pharming, phishing, malware, botnets). Notify registrar and suspend domain if no immediate remedy. 4. Registry to maintain stats on inaccurate Whois , security threats found, and actions taken. 5. Registry needs mechanism to handling complaints about inaccurate Whois, security, etc. 6. Registry must ensure immediate consequences (incl suspension) for inaccurate Whois or domain use in breach of applicable law Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs: consumer protection, sensitive strings and regulated markets (non-exhaustive list of TLDs in annex 1, page 9) 1. . Registrant ToS should require compliance with applicable laws, incl privacy, consumer protection, fair lending, organic farming, disclsoures 2. Registry will require registrars to notify registrants of ToS at time of registration. 3. Registry will require registrants collecting sensitive health or financial data have reasonable security measures as defined by applicable laws and industry standards. 4. Registry to establish relationship with regulators or industry self-regulatory body, plus strategy to mitigate risks of fraud & illegal activities. 5. Registry will require registrars to have single point of contact for complaints and mitigation Additional Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs in financial, gambling, professional services, environmental, health and fitness, corporate identifiers, and charity: 6. Registry must verify and validate registrant authorization, charter, license or other credentials 7. if in doubt about credentials, Registry should consult with national supervisory authority 8. Registry must do periodic checks on registrant validity and compliance with above requirements. Safeguards for Category 2 gTLDs: restricted registration policies 1. Strings in Category 1 may restrict registration, appropriate to risks. Be transparent and give equal access to registrars and registrants. 2. Generic gTLDs may have "exclusive" registry access if it serves a public interest goal. Non-exhaustive list of generic terms where applicant has proposed exclusive access: .antivirus, .app, .autoinsurance, .baby, .beauty, .blog, .book, .broker, .carinsurance,.cars, .cloud, .courses, .cpa, .cruise, .data, .dvr, .financialaid, .flowers, .food, .game, .grocery, .hair, .hotel, .hotels .insurance, .jewelry, .mail,.makeup, .map, .mobile, .motorcycles, .movie, .music, .news, .phone,.salon,.search, .shop, .show, .skin, .song, .store, .tennis, .theater, .theatre, .tires, .tunes, .video, .watches, .weather, .yachts c. For further GAC consideration (.amazon .patagonia .date .spa .yun .thai .zulu .wine .vin ) d. Ability for applicants to change applied-for string in order to address GACconcerns -- no prior BC position. Concerns with changing strings? e. Opinion of impacted community should be duly taken into account -- consistent with BC support for community priority for new gTLDs (2010) f. Reconsider contention sets for singular and plural versions of the same string. --consistent with BC consensus discussions before and in Beijing g. Initial protection for intergovernmental organization names and acronyms atsecond level --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; --BC should support "Strawman" TMCH warning notices for IGOs -- at least until GAC review of RPMs one year after 75th gTLD is launched. 2. finalize RAA and require it for registrars selling domains in new gTLDs. --consistent with BC position (Jan-2012) 3. GAC's 2007 Whois Principles should be "duly taken into account" by Directory Services Expert Working Group. (Susan K) 4. Amend registry agreement to require permanent protection of Olympics and Red Cross --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; 5. more information on Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specifications: 1. can 3rd party or governments raise concern about PIC compliance? 2. can applicants later amend their PICs? 3. will ICANN make registry operators aware of their PICs? 4. requirements to maximize public visibility of PICs? 5. how to amend where a registry made no PICs? (but should have) 6. Are PICs enforceable? --BC said ICANN should enforce PICs 7. Will ICANN follow sanctions recommended by PIC DRP? 8. Measures to remediate serious damage from past registration policies?

4 6

Updated BC Call Calendar 2013
by Benedetta Rossi 29 Apr '13

29 Apr '13

Dear BC Members, Following feedback received from BC members, I have updated the BC call calendar for 2013 and moved most calls to Thursdays rather than Fridays, with a couple of exceptions with calls scheduled on Mondays. Please find the calendar here: https://community.icann.org/x/0YHbAQ Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat bc-secretariat(a)icann.org <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org

1 0

Status Report - April 27th, 2013
by Benedetta Rossi 27 Apr '13

27 Apr '13

Dear BC Members, Please find below the bi-weekly Status Reports submitted by the Executive Committee, Nominating Committee and myself - BC Secretariat on April 27th, 2013: Elisa Cooper, Chair . Worked with Benedetta to create BC meeting schedule through the end of 2013 . Scheduled call and created agenda for April 26th BC member call . Initiated new election for Finance and Operations Officer Steve DelBianco, Vice Chair, Policy Coordination . Completed balloting and submitted BC comment on ACDR's proposal as UDRP provider . Worked with several BC members on draft comments regarding new RAA. . Mapped GAC advice to prior BC positions, for discussion on 26-Apr member call Chris Chaplow, Vice Chair, Finance & Operations . Review the results published for the Fast Track - FY14 SO/AC Support Requests. . Telef Call to Liaise with CSG Finance Group on the FY14 SO/AC support Requests. . Prepare the BC submission for the main round of - FY14 SO/AC support Requests. . Discuss with IPC Treasurer Constituency Banking issues, status and possible solutions with ICANN. . IRTP-D WG call and submission of BC feedback to WG Q&A. Marilyn Cade, CSG Representative . Collaboration with Chris Chaplow on BC funding requests for ICANN. . Reviewed two applications, as Credentials Committee liaison. . Reviewed ATRT2 questions in prep for member call to suggest possible BC enhancements. Ron Andruff, Nominating Committee Highlights from the Nominating Committee meeting in Beijing; the full Report Card was posted to the BC list on 15 April 2013. At ICANN Beijing the Nom Com held two historic 'open meetings' - the first being an Outreach Sub-Committee meeting; the second being a Nom Com general business meeting. This open approach was established at the Nom Com's first meeting at ICANN Toronto and is intended to foster transparency and more clarity into the work of the Nominating Committee. The ICANN Beijing schedule also held the most Nom Com meetings in the history of the Committee's work at an ICANN meeting. It included: . One 1-hour open public Outreach Sub-committee meeting . Four 1-hour breakfast meetings where the Chair and two Vice Chairs of the GNSO Council were invited for one meeting with the Committee, and the ICANN CFO was invited for another. . One 1-hour lunch meeting where the Board Governance Committee was invited. . One 1-hour Nom Com Public Workshop to provide information about the makeup and role of the Nominating Committee. . One 1.5 hour planning session for ICANN Durban selection meetings In all, the Nominating Committee was in session for 9.5 hours during ICANN Beijing. In addition, Nom Com members took turns hosting an information table in the conference area during all breaks and lunches during ICANN Beijing meeting week. Benedetta Rossi, BC Secretariat . Drafted and published the elections procedure and timeline for the upcoming BC election for the position of Vice Chair for Finance & Operations. Procedure & timeline were checked and confirmed by the Chair. . Supported BC remotely for Beijing meeting - ensured smooth running of meetings, attended calls, ran remote participation, supported members and Excomm remotely for ad hoc questions & requests. . Worked with BC Chair to finalize BC call calendar for 2013. . Checked and submitted to BC Credentials Committee two applications to join the BC. Followed up with applicants by submitting questions on behalf of the Credentials Committee. Applications are on hold for the moment. . Follow up on invoicing round for 2013: paid up members were sent receipts, and first official invoicing reminder was submitted. . Drafted minutes for BC meeting in Beijing. . Beijing materials posted on BC website & announced to BC members. . Researched and presented to Excomm ways to open up the Excomm mailing list/archives to BC members for transparency purposes. . Processed several payments on behalf of the BC (translation for Newsletter & Factsheet, graphic designer fees, etc) . Updated BC wiki teleconference section with transcripts, minutes and recordings. . Posted Newsletter & Factsheet on the BC website. . Scheduled and attended BC members call on April 26. . Responded to member questions and requests. . Aggregated status reports received to submit to members. -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat bc-secretariat(a)icann.org <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org

1 0

Bejing meeting materials now posted on BC Website
by Benedetta Rossi 27 Apr '13

27 Apr '13

Dear BC Members, Please note that Beijing meeting materials for the BC & CSG meetings are now posted on the BC website. The materials include all transcripts and the minutes for the BC Meeting which took place on Tuesday, April 9th, 2013. Please find the materials here: http://www.bizconst.org/BEIJING_meeting.html Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat bc-secretariat(a)icann.org <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org

1 0

I: [bc-gnso] for discussion of BC comment on GAC Advice for new gTLDs
by Benedetta Rossi 26 Apr '13

26 Apr '13

Please see below the email that Steve is referring to on the BC call. -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat bc-secretariat(a)icann.org <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org Da: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] Per conto di Steve DelBianco Inviato: vendredi 26 avril 2013 15:53 A: 'bc - GNSO list' Oggetto: [bc-gnso] for discussion of BC comment on GAC Advice for new gTLDs This is for discussion during today's BC Member call, during the Policy segment of the agenda. Background for BC comments on Beijing GAC Advice Full GAC Communique and Advice from Beijing <http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/gac-to-board-18apr13-en.pdf> here. Initial public comments due 14-May 1. New gTLDs: a. GAC objections to specific applications (. africa . gcc . islam . halal) b. Safeguards for new gTLDs (Annex 1) Safeguards for all new gTLDs 1. Registry does Whois verification checks 2x per year 2. Registrant ToS should prohibit malware, botnets, phishing, piracy, TM/copyright infringement, fraud, deception, or anything contrary to applicable law. 3. Registry to periodically check domains in TLD for security threats (pharming, phishing, malware, botnets). Notify registrar and suspend domain if no immediate remedy. 4. Registry to maintain stats on inaccurate Whois , security threats found, and actions taken. 5. Registry needs mechanism to handling complaints about inaccurate Whois, security, etc. 6. Registry must ensure immediate consequences (incl suspension) for inaccurate Whois or domain use in breach of applicable law Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs: consumer protection, sensitive strings and regulated markets (non-exhaustive list of TLDs in annex 1, page 9) 1. . Registrant ToS should require compliance with applicable laws, incl privacy, consumer protection, fair lending, organic farming, disclsoures 2. Registry will require registrars to notify registrants of ToS at time of registration. 3. Registry will require registrants collecting sensitive health or financial data have reasonable security measures as defined by applicable laws and industry standards. 4. Registry to establish relationship with regulators or industry self-regulatory body, plus strategy to mitigate risks of fraud & illegal activities. 5. Registry will require registrars to have single point of contact for complaints and mitigation Additional Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs in financial, gambling, professional services, environmental, health and fitness, corporate identifiers, and charity: 6. Registry must verify and validate registrant authorization, charter, license or other credentials 7. if in doubt about credentials, Registry should consult with national supervisory authority 8. Registry must do periodic checks on registrant validity and compliance with above requirements. Safeguards for Category 2 gTLDs: restricted registration policies 1. Strings in Category 1 may restrict registration, appropriate to risks. Be transparent and give equal access to registrars and registrants. 2. Generic gTLDs may have "exclusive" registry access if it serves a public interest goal. Non-exhaustive list of generic terms where applicant has proposed exclusive access: .antivirus, .app, .autoinsurance, .baby, .beauty, .blog, .book, .broker, .carinsurance,.cars, .cloud, .courses, .cpa, .cruise, .data, .dvr, .financialaid, .flowers, .food, .game, .grocery, .hair, .hotel, .hotels .insurance, .jewelry, .mail,.makeup, .map, .mobile, .motorcycles, .movie, .music, .news, .phone,.salon,.search, .shop, .show, .skin, .song, .store, .tennis, .theater, .theatre, .tires, .tunes, .video, .watches, .weather, .yachts c. For further GAC consideration (.amazon .patagonia .date .spa .yun .thai .zulu .wine .vin ) d. Ability for applicants to change applied-for string in order to address GACconcerns -- no prior BC position. Concerns with changing strings? e. Opinion of impacted community should be duly taken into account -- consistent with BC support for community priority for new gTLDs (2010) f. Reconsider contention sets for singular and plural versions of the same string. --consistent with BC consensus discussions before and in Beijing g. Initial protection for intergovernmental organization names and acronyms atsecond level --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; --BC should support "Strawman" TMCH warning notices for IGOs -- at least until GAC review of RPMs one year after 75th gTLD is launched. 2. finalize RAA and require it for registrars selling domains in new gTLDs. --consistent with BC position (Jan-2012) 3. GAC's 2007 Whois Principles should be "duly taken into account" by Directory Services Expert Working Group. (Susan K) 4. Amend registry agreement to require permanent protection of Olympics and Red Cross --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; 5. more information on Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specifications: 1. can 3rd party or governments raise concern about PIC compliance? 2. can applicants later amend their PICs? 3. will ICANN make registry operators aware of their PICs? 4. requirements to maximize public visibility of PICs? 5. how to amend where a registry made no PICs? (but should have) 6. Are PICs enforceable? --BC said ICANN should enforce PICs 7. Will ICANN follow sanctions recommended by PIC DRP? 8. Measures to remediate serious damage from past registration policies?

2 1

for discussion of BC comment on GAC Advice for new gTLDs
by Steve DelBianco 26 Apr '13

26 Apr '13

This is for discussion during today's BC Member call, during the Policy segment of the agenda. Background for BC comments on Beijing GAC Advice Full GAC Communique and Advice from Beijing here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/gac-to-board-18apr13-en.pdf>. Initial public comments due 14-May 1. New gTLDs: a. GAC objections to specific applications (. africa . gcc . islam . halal) b. Safeguards for new gTLDs (Annex 1) Safeguards for all new gTLDs 1. Registry does Whois verification checks 2x per year 2. Registrant ToS should prohibit malware, botnets, phishing, piracy, TM/copyright infringement, fraud, deception, or anything contrary to applicable law. 3. Registry to periodically check domains in TLD for security threats (pharming, phishing, malware, botnets). Notify registrar and suspend domain if no immediate remedy. 4. Registry to maintain stats on inaccurate Whois , security threats found, and actions taken. 5. Registry needs mechanism to handling complaints about inaccurate Whois, security, etc. 6. Registry must ensure immediate consequences (incl suspension) for inaccurate Whois or domain use in breach of applicable law Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs: consumer protection, sensitive strings and regulated markets (non-exhaustive list of TLDs in annex 1, page 9) 1. . Registrant ToS should require compliance with applicable laws, incl privacy, consumer protection, fair lending, organic farming, disclsoures 2. Registry will require registrars to notify registrants of ToS at time of registration. 3. Registry will require registrants collecting sensitive health or financial data have reasonable security measures as defined by applicable laws and industry standards. 4. Registry to establish relationship with regulators or industry self-regulatory body, plus strategy to mitigate risks of fraud & illegal activities. 5. Registry will require registrars to have single point of contact for complaints and mitigation Additional Safeguards for Category 1 gTLDs in financial, gambling, professional services, environmental, health and fitness, corporate identifiers, and charity: 6. Registry must verify and validate registrant authorization, charter, license or other credentials 7. if in doubt about credentials, Registry should consult with national supervisory authority 8. Registry must do periodic checks on registrant validity and compliance with above requirements. Safeguards for Category 2 gTLDs: restricted registration policies 1. Strings in Category 1 may restrict registration, appropriate to risks. Be transparent and give equal access to registrars and registrants. 2. Generic gTLDs may have “exclusive” registry access if it serves a public interest goal. Non-exhaustive list of generic terms where applicant has proposed exclusive access: .antivirus, .app, .autoinsurance, .baby, .beauty, .blog, .book, .broker, .carinsurance,.cars, .cloud, .courses, .cpa, .cruise, .data, .dvr, .financialaid, .flowers, .food, .game, .grocery, .hair, .hotel, .hotels .insurance, .jewelry, .mail,.makeup, .map, .mobile, .motorcycles, .movie, .music, .news, .phone,.salon,.search, .shop, .show, .skin, .song, .store, .tennis, .theater, .theatre, .tires, .tunes, .video, .watches, .weather, .yachts c. For further GAC consideration (.amazon .patagonia .date .spa .yun .thai .zulu .wine .vin ) d. Ability for applicants to change applied-for string in order to address GACconcerns -- no prior BC position. Concerns with changing strings? e. Opinion of impacted community should be duly taken into account -- consistent with BC support for community priority for new gTLDs (2010) f. Reconsider contention sets for singular and plural versions of the same string. --consistent with BC consensus discussions before and in Beijing g. Initial protection for intergovernmental organization names and acronyms atsecond level --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; --BC should support “Strawman” TMCH warning notices for IGOs -- at least until GAC review of RPMs one year after 75th gTLD is launched. 2. finalize RAA and require it for registrars selling domains in new gTLDs. --consistent with BC position (Jan-2012) 3. GAC’s 2007 Whois Principles should be “duly taken into account” by Directory Services Expert Working Group. (Susan K) 4. Amend registry agreement to require permanent protection of Olympics and Red Cross --no official BC position, but generally supportive of GAC; 5. more information on Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specifications: 1. can 3rd party or governments raise concern about PIC compliance? 2. can applicants later amend their PICs? 3. will ICANN make registry operators aware of their PICs? 4. requirements to maximize public visibility of PICs? 5. how to amend where a registry made no PICs? (but should have) 6. Are PICs enforceable? --BC said ICANN should enforce PICs 7. Will ICANN follow sanctions recommended by PIC DRP? 8. Measures to remediate serious damage from past registration policies?

1 1

Update to BC Meeting Schedule 2013
by Benedetta Rossi 25 Apr '13

25 Apr '13

Dear BC Members, I just wanted to notify members that there has been a modification in date for one of the BC meetings for 2013 which was initially scheduled to take place on the 5th of July 2013. The Planning meeting for Durban will now take place on Monday, July 1st, 2013 at 11 am EST. The full meeting schedule can be viewed on the BC wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/0YHbAQ Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat bc-secretariat(a)icann.org <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org

1 0