December 2018 - Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FILED: BC response to EPDP on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 23, 2018

Dec. 23, 2018

BC members, Attached is our final response to the initial report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld…> of the Expedited PDP (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data (link<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-ini…> to comments page). The BC is represented on this PDP by Margie Milam and Mark Svancarek, with support from several BC members. Thanks to Mason Cole for leading BC comment drafting. We had 4 drafting calls and several BC members contributing, including Susan, Sajda, Statton, Alex, Tim Chen, Margie, Mark Svancarek, Faisal, Vivek, and Steve. Our comments are attached, and are also reflected in this large sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GUf86Ngo97g74wLyDmeBv8lGcUtjLJWjsEd…> compiled by ICANN staff (at row 41) Hope everyone has a relaxing and enjoyable holiday.

1 0

BC comment on Supplemental Report of New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 21, 2018

Dec. 21, 2018

Attached is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding Supplemental Initial Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4). This comment was co-drafted by Susan Kawaguchi, Vivek Goyal, Andrew Mack, and Steve DelBianco. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0

ICANN Technical Study Group on Access to Non-Public Registration Data Begins Work
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 16, 2018

Dec. 16, 2018

At the Barcelona meeting, recall that the BC and others encouraged ICANN to explore a Unified Access Model for Whois, where ICANN Org accepts most of the legal risk and can thereby require registrars to respond to accredited queries. During our CSG exchange with the board in Barcelona, Goran said he’s create a Technical Study Group. This week, ICANN announced<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-12-14-en> the creation of that group: LOS ANGELES – 14 December 2018 -- The Technical Study Group on Access to Non-Public Registration Data (TSG-RD) began its work this week. The group is made up of 10 invited members with expertise in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP), distributed authentication/authorization technologies, systems architecture, design-thinking and other relevant topics. The group is coordinated by Ram Mohan<https://www.icann.org/profiles/>, the CTO of Afilias and the former Security and Stability Advisory Committee liaison to the ICANN Board of Directors. The group will explore technical solutions for providing third parties access to non-public data via RDAP. The particular technical implementation approach the group will study was described during a data protection/privacy update webinar<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/data-protection-meetings-2017-12-08-en> held 8 October. That possible approach would place ICANN in the position of determining whether a third-party's query for non-public registration data ought to be approved to proceed. If approved, ICANN would ask the appropriate registry or registrar to provide the requested data to ICANN, which in turn would provide it to the third party. If ICANN does not approve the request, the query would be denied. This group's work will not interfere with community efforts to develop an RDAP profile prior to deployment of the protocol. In addition, this effort does not replace the community's policy development process. ICANN is exploring this approach to determine whether it would diminish the legal liability of contracted parties, who would provide access to non-public registration data. The TSG-RD's discussions anticipate discussing the following key issues: assessment of available tools and protocols; authentication/authorization; data transport/storage and audit; access control protocol; performance requirements; transparency and assignment of responsibility; error conditions; costs; maintenance and evolution; and governance. The group will be supported with technical input from John Crain, ICANN Chief Security, Stability and Resiliency Officer, and Francisco Arias, Senior Director of Technical Services for the Global Domains Divisions (GDD). The invited members of the TSG-RD are: · Benedict Addis · Gavin Brown · Jorge Cano · Steve Crocker · Scott Hollenbeck · Jody Kolker · Murray Kucherawy · Andy Newton · Tomofumi Okubo More information about the group is available here<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/tsg-access-non-public-registration-da…>. You can follow the TSG-RD group's discussions on their publicly archived mailing list<https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tsg-access-rd>.

1 0

Re: [bc-gnso] BC comment on Proposed Policy for Protecting Red Cross Names in all gTLDs
by J. Scott Evans Dec. 14, 2018

Dec. 14, 2018

Nicely done. Fully support. [ttps://inside.corp.adobe.com/content/dam/brandcenter/images/image002.gif] J. Scott Evans 408.536.5336 (tel) 345 Park Avenue, Mail Stop W11-544 Director, IP & Advertising 408.709.6162 (cell) San Jose, CA, 95110, USA Adobe. Make It an Experience. jsevans(a)adobe.com www.adobe.com Admitted to KY and NC Bars only From: Bc-gnso <bc-gnso-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org> Date: Friday, December 14, 2018 at 7:08 AM To: "comments-red-cross-names-consensus-policy-21nov18(a)icann.org" <comments-red-cross-names-consensus-policy-21nov18(a)icann.org> Cc: BC List <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] BC comment on Proposed Policy for Protecting Red Cross Names in all gTLDs Below (and attached) is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding Proposed Consensus Policy on Protections for Certain Red Cross and Red Crescent Names in All Generic Top-Level Domains. In order to safeguard both public policy and consumer trust in the safety of the DNS, the BC fully supports the proposal that Red Cross names and their variants, as detailed in the agreed finite list within the Final Report, should be reserved in all gTLDs. In particular we note that these recommendations are based upon international and national humanitarian law, and not upon intellectual property rights. We also note that the reservation of these names clearly fits within ICANN's mission of ensuring the security of the DNS. It is important to us that going forward the cooperation achieved between the GAC and GNSO during this policy process, particularly regarding efforts carried out during ICANN 58's facilitated discussion, is repeated in future matters that require such a level of broad involvement from government and non-government actors. Perhaps in this way, future processes can be expedited to better answer the demands of the global community while maintaining the consensus approach. This Comment was drafted by Marie Pattullo and Mark Datysgeld. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0

BC comment on Proposed Policy for Protecting Red Cross Names in all gTLDs
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 14, 2018

Dec. 14, 2018

Below (and attached) is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding Proposed Consensus Policy on Protections for Certain Red Cross and Red Crescent Names in All Generic Top-Level Domains. In order to safeguard both public policy and consumer trust in the safety of the DNS, the BC fully supports the proposal that Red Cross names and their variants, as detailed in the agreed finite list within the Final Report, should be reserved in all gTLDs. In particular we note that these recommendations are based upon international and national humanitarian law, and not upon intellectual property rights. We also note that the reservation of these names clearly fits within ICANN's mission of ensuring the security of the DNS. It is important to us that going forward the cooperation achieved between the GAC and GNSO during this policy process, particularly regarding efforts carried out during ICANN 58's facilitated discussion, is repeated in future matters that require such a level of broad involvement from government and non-government actors. Perhaps in this way, future processes can be expedited to better answer the demands of the global community while maintaining the consensus approach. This Comment was drafted by Marie Pattullo and Mark Datysgeld. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0

BC Comment on Initial Report of new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 11, 2018

Dec. 11, 2018

Attached is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding the Initial Report of the new gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross Community Working Group (CCWG-AP) This comment was drafted by Adetola Sogbesan, David Snead, Marilyn Cade, Jimson Olufuye, and Steve DelBianco. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

2 1

BC comment on Draft Final Report of Security and Stability Advisory Committee Review (SSAC2)
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 3, 2018

Dec. 3, 2018

Sorry, Tim. I corrected your name in the submission. Attached is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding the Draft Final Report of The Second Security and Stability Advisory Committee Review (SSAC2). This Comment was drafted by Tim Chen. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0

BC comment on Draft Final Report of Security and Stability Advisory Committee Review (SSAC2)
by Steve DelBianco Dec. 3, 2018

Dec. 3, 2018

Attached is the comment of ICANN’s Business Constituency (BC), regarding the Draft Final Report of The Second Security and Stability Advisory Committee Review (SSAC2). This Comment was drafted by Mark Chen. It was approved in accord with our Charter. -- Steve DelBianco Vice Chair for Policy Coordination ICANN Business Constituency (BC)

1 0