- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

RE: [bc-gnso] Reminder & Agenda : BC Members Call
by john＠crediblecontext.com July 10, 2012

July 10, 2012

Benedetta, With regard to the selection of the new GNSO Council Chair, each house must make a single nomination by September 26. Candidate presentation will be in Toronto at the weekend meeting and the vote will be at the close of the public meeting on October 17. The Council is also discussing changing a portion of the Saturday meeting to an open discussion format akin to the current wrap-up session. It is thought that an opportunity to discuss without agenda the issues of import to the full GNSO could make the rest of the week's work more focused and productive. Talk to you tomorrow. Cheers, John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [bc-gnso] Reminder & Agenda : BC Members Call From: Benedetta Rossi <bc-secretariat(a)icann.org> Date: Tue, July 10, 2012 6:49 am To: bc - GNSO list <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Dear BC Members, Please find attached the updated agenda for tomorrow's BC Members Call taking place at 11 a.m. EDT. Please note that the order of speakers has been modified, and that BC members are kindly invited to share their opinions and feedback with the group regarding specific sessions they attended in Prague. Thank you ever so much for your help, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

Reminder & Agenda : BC Members Call
by Benedetta Rossi July 10, 2012

July 10, 2012

Dear BC Members, Please find attached the updated agenda for tomorrow's BC Members Call taking place at 11 a.m. EDT. Please note that the order of speakers has been modified, and that BC members are kindly invited to share their opinions and feedback with the group regarding specific sessions they attended in Prague. Thank you ever so much for your help, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0

FW: Extension to Reply Comment Period: Draft Statement of ICANN's Role and Remit in SSR | ICANN
by Marilyn Cade July 6, 2012

July 6, 2012

The BC was pleased that Jeff Moss and Patrick Jones joined the BC's meeting in Prague. The transcript is attached. That was a high level interaction, but we now want to provide BC comments to the Framework and Remit in SSR. As members will recall, we have a sub group to develop and focus on our BC positions in such areas, which are about ICANN governance. All members are welcomed! To date, members with special focus, declared interest or expertise: Jeff Brueggeman, AT&T [member for CSG to SSR RT]Scott McCormick, Mccormickict.com [Official appointee from BC to DSSR]Bill Smith, PayPal [Independent expert to WHOIS RT]Lynn Goodendorf [Independent expert to WHOIS RT]Susan Goodendorf, Facebook, [member for CSG to WHOIS RT]Angie Graves,WebGroupMarilyn Cade, ICT StrategiesJim Baskin, VerizonMartin Sutton, HSBC In particular, I am thinking that MarkMonitor, Canadian International Pharmacy Association, Facebook, BBB will have an interest,but I may be missing other members who have a SSR focus. Our Secretariat will work with Jeff and Scott to find a date for a call with BC members on SSR comments. Given the time frame for the extension, we may work for an early August date, but the Secretariat will do a doodle for availability for all BC members, after checking Jeff and Scott's availability. Marilyn Cade, BC Chair Extension to Reply Comment Period: Draft Statement of ICANN's Role and Remit in SSR 5 July 2012 Based on community feedback received during the ICANN meeting in Prague, CZ from 23-28 June, ICANN is extending the reply comment period on the Draft Statement of ICANN's role and remit in the security, stability and resiliency of the Internet's unique identifier systems. The reply comment period is being extended to 31 August 2012. Community feedback is encouraged. Several consultation sessions on the role and remit statement were held in Prague: ccNSO Member's meeting - http://prague44.icann.org/node/31679 Commercial and Business Users Constituency - http://prague44.icann.org/node/31709 ICANN Security Team open session - http://prague44.icann.org/node/31745 The role and remit statement was also discussed during the DSSA Working Group meeting, http://prague44.icann.org/node/31805, and Board-level DNS Risk Management Framework Working Group open session, http://prague44.icann.org/node/31815. Transcripts or audio for these sessions are available on the links above. Comments submitted to date can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/draft-ssr-role-remit/

1 0

Save the date: BC members Prague debrief & BC Members Pre council calls: July 11th & 17th 2012 at 11 a.m. EDT
by Benedetta Rossi July 5, 2012

July 5, 2012

Dear BC Members, Please save the date for two upcoming BC Members Calls: *1. Wednesday July 11th 2012 @ 11 a.m. EDT - Prague debrief call. Duration: 1 hour. 2. Tuesday July 17th 2012 @ 11 a.m. EDT - Pre Council members call. Duration 1 hour.* Please find the agendas attached. Please also note that the second call - the Pre Council call - is scheduled in preparation to the GNSO Council call scheduled to take place on July 20th 2012. Dial in details will follow, but please let me know if you require 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

1 0

Prague Meeting Report - call for members observations
by Benedetta Rossi July 5, 2012

July 5, 2012

Dear Members, For the Prague meeting we would like to draft a Meeting Report based on members' observations. It would be great if members could email me 2-3 paragraphs on the particular session they attended. This is a single effort to a meeting summary, and not intended as an official document. It is very much based on your personal observations. In particular: * WHOIS - Elisa Cooper * New CEO & Leadership - Marilyn Cade * New gTLDs - Steve DelBianco * Council activities - Zahid Jamil / John Berard * SSR - Jeff Brueggeman * IGF - Ayesha Hassan * Budget - Chris Chaplow * Strat Plan - Marilyn Cade / Chris Chaplow * Newcomers - Gabriela Szlak / Marie Pattullo * Angie / Jim / Bill / Phil / Mario / Bryce / Janet / John Myers - Do you have a particular session or topic you would like to pick? You can also, of course, contribute to any of the other topics! Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 1

Re: ICANN 44 Documentation Production and Participation Survey
by Marilyn Cade July 3, 2012

July 3, 2012

If you registered, you should have received this. Please do respond in your individual capacity. Perhaps we can help to provide feedback about business users expectations. M Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: no-reply(a)icann.org Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 20:56:15 To: <no-reply(a)icann.org> Subject: ICANN 44 Documentation Production and Participation Survey Dear Participant of ICANN 44: We thank you for your participation at ICANN 44 in Prague. If you attended the ICANN meeting in person or remotely, we ask you to take a short survey on the information provided about the details of the sessions at ICANN 44. The survey is very short and will only take a couple of minutes to fill in. We appreciate your time and feedback that will help us in making improvements. Please use this link to participate in the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ICANN44Docs If you followed any sessions remotely or to refer to your colleagues who you know that they followed the meeting remotely, please also note the following survey link below: ICANN 44 Remote Participation Services: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/icann44RP If you would like to contact us please write to participate(a)icann.org. Kind regards ICANN Participation and Engagement [You are receiving this mail because according to our records you agreed to receive e-mails from us at the time of your registration at ICANN 44. If this is not the case, please report to participate(a)icann.org]

1 0

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague - New gTLD's
by Chris Chaplow June 28, 2012

June 28, 2012

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague 28th June 2012. New gTLDs >>PHIL CORWIN: GOOD AFTERNOON, PHILIP CORWIN SPEAKING AGAIN AS COUNSEL OF THE INTERNET COMMERCE ASSOCIATION, I WANT TO ADDRESS UNIFORM RAPID SUSPENSION. IT'S ONE OF TWO REQUIRED NEW RITLE PROTECTION MECHANISMS. IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IT BE DONE RIGHT SO THAT WE GET MAXIMUM LEVELS OF REGISTRATION AT NEW TLDS SO THERE'S NOT A DELAY IN DELEGATION TO THE ROOT BECAUSE URS ISN'T READY TO GO WHEN APPLICANTS ARE READY TO BE DELEGATED. IT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT THERE HAS NOT BEEN A COLLABORATIVE MULTISTAKEHOLDER IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS FOR URS OVER THE PAST MONTHS AS THERE HAS BEEN FOR TRADEMARK CLEARINGHOUSE, WHICH AS A CONSEQUENCE IS MUCH FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD TOWARD BEING DONE. WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT URS CANNOT ACHIEVE THE DESIRED PRICE TARGET. WE'VE BEEN PROVIDED NO DATA OR ANALYSIS OF THAT DATA TO JUSTIFY THAT CONCLUSION. I FILED A DOCUMENT DISCLOSURE REQUEST 30 DAYS AGO, HAVE RECEIVED NOTHING YET. SO WE DO NEED THAT DATA ANALYSIS. WHAT WE DON'T NEED IS $175,000 BEING SPENT ON TWO UNDEFINED SUMMITS. WE NEED SOME STAFF SUPPORT FOR A IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS THAT'S OPEN IN MEMBERSHIP, TRANSPARENT IN OPERATION. WE HAD A MEETING ON THIS SUBJECT YESTERDAY. IT WAS APPARENT THAT PEOPLE WITH VERY DIFFERENT PER SPERFGETIVES ON THE ISSUE -- PERSPECTIVES ON THE ISSUE SHARE A COMMON DESIRE TO CREATE AND IMPLEMENT I URS THAT ACHIEVES THE GOALS OF RAPID SUSPENSION OFEN INCONTROVERTIBLY INFRINGING DOMAINS AT THE LOWEST FEASIBLE COST WHILE PRESERVING REGISTRANT RIGHTS. SUCH A GROUP WOULD BE BEST ABLE TO AVOID REOPENING DIVISIVE POLICY ISSUES IN THE EXTENT THAT ANYTHING HAS TO BE REOPENED IN POLICY, THAT CONSENSUS PROCESS WOULD GUARANTEE THAT THE GNSO WHICH SHOULD PLAY ANY ROLE IN REVIEWING ANY POLICY CHANGES IF THERE'S A CONSENSUS, IT WILL BE EASY FOR THE GNSO TO CONSIDER IT AND PROBABLY IMPLEMENT IT. TO SUM UP, LET'S GET STARTED WITH AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT URS IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN REPORT ON ITS PROGRESS IN TORONTO. THANK YOU. >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU.

1 0

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague - Globalization of ICANN
by Chris Chaplow June 28, 2012

June 28, 2012

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague 28th June 2012. Globalization of ICANN >>STEVE CROCKER: WE'RE RUNNING CONSIDERABLY BEHIND TIME AND THERE'S JUST SIMPLY CHOICES TO BE MADE. WE CAN KEEP GOING WITH THIS. WE HAVE GLOBALIZATION OF ICANN AND NEW gTLDs AND SOME TOPICS THAT ARE LISTED UNDER ANY OTHER BUSINES." LET ME JUST DO A QUICK SHOW OF HANDS HERE. WHICH OF THESE WOULD YOU LIKE NOT TO TALK ABOUT. ALL IN FAVOR OF NOT TALKING ABOUT GLOBALIZATION OF ICANN, RAISE YOUR HAND. THANK YOU. ALL IN FAVOR OF NOT TALKING ABOUT NEW gTLDs, RAISE YOUR HAND. OHHHH. [ LAUGHTER ] >> THERE'S ONE BACK THERE. [ LAUGHTER ] >>STEVE CROCKER: I SEE. SO PEOPLE ARE ANXIOUS TO TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS. YOU GET -- YOU GET 20 SECONDS HERE. GO. SERIOUSLY. CRAM IT IN. 140 CHARACTERS. <edit> >>MARILYN CADE: MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE AND I AM GOING TO CHANGE WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY BECAUSE WE JUST SENT A MESSAGE TO THE WORLD THAT I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE WITH. [ APPLAUSE ] I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IT. HERE'S WHY I'M NOT COMFORTABLE. THIS ORGANIZATION, I HEARD A METAPHOR ON MONDAY ABOUT ICANN BEING AN OASIS. WE WANT MORE PEOPLE TO COME HERE. AND GLOBALIZATION IS SO ESSENTIAL WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT SO MUCH MORE ACTIVELY. SO I THINK ACTUALLY FOR THE FUTURE OF ICANN, I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU, GLOBALIZATION AS A TOPIC IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN NEW gTLDs. [ APPLAUSE ] >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU. >>MARILYN CADE: SO I'M GOING TO MENTION A SPECIFIC SUGGESTION THAT B.C. MADE ABOUT AN OPPORTUNITY THAT ICANN COULD HAVE GRASPED TO SEND A WONDERFUL MESSAGE TO THE WORLD ABOUT THEIR COMMITMENT TO GLOBALIZATION. WE COULD HAVE PRIORITIZED IDNs. WE DIDN'T DO IT BUT WE COULD HAVE. THAT WOULD BE SUCH A GIFT TO US AND TO THE WORLD TO SAY WE ARE ACTING IN THE GLOBAL PUBLIC INTEREST. WE ARE IN FACT IN TROUBLE OUT THERE WITH PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTANDING US, NOT KNOWING US NOT CARING. LET'S DO SOMETHING ACTIVE AND PROACTIVE, AND WE STILL CAN. BUT LET'S ALSO STILL REALIZE THAT GLOBALIZATION IS OUR FIRST PRIORITY. >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU. NEXT.

1 0

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague Capacity of Volunteers and ICANN staff
by Chris Chaplow June 28, 2012

June 28, 2012

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague 28th June 2012. Balancing the capacity of Volunteers and ICANN staff >>AYESHA HASSAN: THANK YOU. AYESHA HASSAN FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. THE STRENGTH AND CREDIBILITY OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES DEPEND ON REAL SUBSTANTIVE INPUT FROM A RANGE OF STAKEHOLDERS' EXPERIENCE, EXPERTISE, AND VIEWS. THE RISK IS THAT WHEN HIGH DEMANDS ON THE COMMUNITY TO COMMENT AND CONTRIBUTE ARE TOO HIGH, IT ENDANGERERS THIS BROAD STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND OFTEN MEANS THAT THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES OR FINANCIAL OR OTHER INTERESTS CANNOT OR JUST DO NOT CONTRIBUTE, WHICH NARROWS THE PARTICIPATION IN THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. I SEE THIS FIRSTHAND AT ICC AND THE WORK THAT WE TRY TO DO TO CONTRIBUTE AT ICANN AS WELL. AS WE WORK TO GET MORE INPUT INTO THE PROCESS, AND THE HIGH DEMAND UNDERMINES THE GOAL, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR IF THE BOARD HAS SPECIFIC IDEAS FOR HOW TO ADDRESS THIS. I HEARD THOMAS ROESSLER's POINT THAT A CANDID PRIORITIES DISCUSSION COULD BE ONE WAY TO START ADDRESSING SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED UNDER THIS AGENDA ITEM. I'D JUST BE INTERESTED TO KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS IN A WAY THAT -- SPECIFICALLY TO ENSURE THAT THE DIVERSITY OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT IS PRESERVED IN THIS PROCESS. THANKS. >>STEVE DelBIANCO: THANK YOU. STEVE DelBIANCO WITH THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY. I SERVE THERE AS THE VICE CHAIR FOR POLICY COORDINATION. THAT'S THE TITLE WE DESIGNED FOR THAT ROLE. BUT IT'S NOT COORDINATION AS MUCH AS IT IS COERCION TO TRY TO GET VOLUNTEERS WITHIN THE BC WHO, LIKE YOU, HAVE DAY JOBS, FULL DAY JOBS. AND GETTING THEM TO TRY TO ALLOCATE ENOUGH TIME TO BE -- TO BE ATTENTIVE TO A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OR WORKING GROUPS. AND THE BC DOES A GREAT JOB PARTICIPATING IN A LOT OF PLACES, BUT THERE AREN'T ENOUGH OF US WITH ENOUGH TIME TO GO AROUND. SO WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE TITLE FROM "VICE CHAIR OF POLICY COORDINATION FOR VICE CHAIR OF POLICY CONSCRIPTION. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FORCE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED BUT I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HOPE FOR THAT. BUT I HAVE THREE SUGGESTIONS. STEVE, YOU MENTIONED THE NOTION OF RIGHT-LIMITING AND YOU USED THE METAPHOR WITH RESPECT TO THE DELEGATION RATE. JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. THERE ARE 14 OPEN RIGHT NOW. IF -- LET'S PLEASE EXPLORE AN IDEA OF LIMITING THAT. PICK A NUMBER. PICK A NUMBER. 10? NO MORE THAN 10 CAN OCCUR AT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS. AND IF YOU HAVE 11, 12, 13, AND 14 READY TO GO THEY MIGHT HAVE WAIT UNTIL THE FIRST ONE PEELS OFF THE LIST. IT MIGHT BE A SIMPLE THING TO TRY. WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. >>BILL SMITH: BILL SMITH, PAYPAL. SO I WAS STRUCK BY TWO WORDS THAT I'VE HEARD HER, TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE BOTH OF THEM, OR AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, TRANSPARENCY. I HOPE WE CAN GET MORE TRUST. AND WE HAVE TO HAVE BOTH TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY, BOTH IN THE ORGANIZATION AND IN THE PROCESSES. THERE IS A FACT, I THINK, THAT WE ARE IGNORING, PERHAPS, IN THIS DISCUSSION. THIS IS A HIERARCHAL ORGANIZATION AND AS A CONSEQUENCE, WHEN WE TAKE DECISIONS AT HIGH LEVELS, THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, AS THE ORGANIZATION GROWS, COVERS MORE TERRITORY, ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REVIEW MORE AND MORE AND MORE. SO AS THE -- THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUES TO GROW, THAT'S JUST -- THAT PROBLEM IS JUST GOING TO GET WORSE. THERE HAVE BEEN SUGGESTIONS TO LIMIT PAGES, NUMBER OF REVIEWS, DOCUMENTS, ET CETERA. I'LL EXCLUDE MYSELF FROM THIS COMMENT. WE'RE ALL INTELLIGENT PEOPLE HERE AND WE WILL FIND WAYS AROUND ANYTHING -- ANY RATE-LIMITING THAT IS PUT IN PLACE. I'M SURE ALL OF YOU KNOW ABOUT SMALL FONTS. THAT'S A WAY TO JAM STUFF IN -- YOU KNOW, INTO PAGES. IT'S NOT GOING TO LIMIT THE STUFF THAT ANY OF US HAVE TO READ AND REVIEW. SO I SUGGEST WE NEED TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE -- AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH, AND THAT IS TO -- TO USE TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY TO OUR -- TO GREATER EFFECT. AND THAT IS TO ENTRUST PEOPLE AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE ORGANIZATION, OR TO FLATTEN THE ORGANIZATION AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO MAKE REAL PROGRESS AND POTENTIALLY DECISIONS IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT MANNER. OTHERWISE, WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE 700 OR A THOUSAND PAGES THAT HAVE TO BE REVIEWED AT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR MEETINGS. AND WE'RE HEARING FROM PEOPLE RIGHT HERE THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK GOING FORWARD. WE MUST CHANGE. OKAY? SO LET'S -- LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT, AS OPPOSED TO, WELL, HOW DO WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, MAKE IT SO ALL THE DECISIONS HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, AT RELATIVELY HIGH LEVELS. FIND A DIFFERENT WAY. WE REALLY NEED TO DO THAT.

1 0

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague - WHOIS
by Chris Chaplow June 28, 2012

June 28, 2012

BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague 28th June 2012. Whois review team final report >> ELISA COOPER: I'M WITH THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY, AND THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY BROADLY SUPPORTED THE 16 RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE WHOIS POLICY REVIEW TEAM. WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT ENSURING THE ACCURACY AND RELY BUILT OF WHOIS IS OF UTMOST CONCERN AND IN PARTICULAR OF THE 16 RECOMMENDATIONS, THERE ARE SORT OF THREE AREAS WHICH WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT. ONE OF THOSE AREAS IS THAT WHOIS DOES BECOME A STRATEGIC PRIORITY FOR THE ORGANIZATION. THE SECOND IS THAT ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ASSURE THE ACCURACY OF WHOIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT. AND THE FINAL AREA WHICH WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IS THAT THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS TO FIND FOR PROXY AND SERVICE PROVIDERS. WE ALSO FEEL STRONGLY THAT THE BOARD ENSURES THAT THERE ARE THE NECESSARY RESOURCES AND BUDGETS ALLOCATED TO MAKING SURE THAT THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE IMPLEMENTED. THANK YOU. >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>STEVE DelBIANCO: DELL STEVE DelBIANCO. CONSCIOUSNESS OF RISKS TO INDIVIDUALS AND THAT MOTIVATED THE CHAIRMAN TO CONTRAST THE TWO VIEWS AND WEIGH THEM. I WANTED TO REMIND EVERYONE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS AS YOU CONSIDER WHAT TO DO WITH THE WHOIS RECOMMENDATIONS YOU DON'T HAVE TO JUST WEIGH VIEWS. YOU CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT SOME FACTS BECAUSE GONZALES WITH SUPPORT OF THE BOARD HAS COMMISSIONED FOUR STUDIES SO THAT WE CAN DO FACT-BASED POLICYMAKING ON WHOIS. AND IN FACT, ONE OF TEZ STUDIES WHICH RESULTS SHOULD BE IN IN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS IS A STUDY OF WHETHER THERE ARE ABUSES TO INDIVIDUALS THAT ARISE AS A RESULT OF THEIR INFORMATION BEING AVAILABLE IN WHOIS. SO IT'S TO THE VERY QUESTION THAT WAS BROUGHT UP. IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT VIEWS. SOME OF IT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT FACTS. THERE ARE THREE OTHER STUDIES IN WHOIS THAT WILL COME IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS THAT ALSO SPEAK TO THE USE OF PRIVACY AND PROXY SERVICES BY INDIVIDUALS AS WELL AS WHETHER THE PRIVACY, PROXY PROVIDERS ARE ADEQUATELY REVEALING. WE SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS DESIGNING THE STUDIES. SO WEIGHTED THE VIEWS BUT GIVE A LOT MORE WEIGHT TO THE FACTS, PLEASE. >>STEVE CROCKER: I LIKE THAT IDEA. THERE WAS A COMMENT IN A REPORT, A U.S. GOVERNMENT REPORT SEVERAL YEARS AGO THAT WHOIS DIDN'T CONTRIBUTE TO SPAM. IN SSAC WE TOOK THAT UP AND RAN A CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT WITH FAIRLY DRAMATIC RESULTS PUBLISHED IN A SAC DOCUMENT ONLINE NOW. HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR SEVERAL YEARS. SO I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WOULD CONTRIBUTE AS WELL. THANK YOU. >>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE. I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY AND I'M CONTINUING A STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER FROM THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY RELATED TO WHOIS. OUR PREVIOUS SPEAKER PROVIDED OUR VIEWS ON THE -- THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE WHOIS REVIEW TEAM. MY COMMENTS ARE PROVIDED TO EXPLAIN OUR VIEW ABOUT THE NATURE AND THE ROLE OF THE VIEW TEAMS. MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY ARE NOT AWARE THAT THE REVIEW TEAMS ARE ESTABLISHED AS A RESULT OF THE AFFIRMATION OF COMMITMENTS. BUT THERE ARE FOUR OF THEM AND THAT THEY DO COME WITH TIMELINES THAT ARE BUILT IN. THEY ARE NOT AWARE THAT THE COMMUNITY SELECTS REPRESENTATIVES WHO ARE THEN APPOINTED AND THEN INDEPENDENT EXPERTS ARE APPOINTED THROUGH A PROCESS THAT INVOLVES THE CEO/PRESIDENT OF ICANN AND THE GAC CHAIR. SO THE STANDING OF THE REVIEW TEAMS IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE. IT HAS ASSIGNED ICANN STAFF AND THE ABILITY TO USE OUTSIDE RESOURCES. IT ALSO ENGAGES IN EXTENSIVE CONSULTATION AS VARIOUS STAGES. IT'S OUR VIEW THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FROM THE REVIEW TEAM PROCESS DO HAVE UNIQUE STATUS COMPARED TO OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS. WE EXPECT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE FULLY IMPLEMENTED WITHIN THE TIME FRAME. IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WILL NOW BE A FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT DONE BY THE STAFF AND WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION. WILL THE FEASABILITY STUDY ASSUME THAT THE RECOMMENDATION SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED OR WILL THE FEASIBILITY STUDY QUESTION WHETHER THEY SHOULD? AND WHEN THE RECOMMENDATIONS GO TO THE COUNCIL FROM THE BOARD, IF ANY DO, WILL THERE BE AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE PDPS ARE ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION AND NOT ABOUT REASSESSING THE RECOMMENDATIONS? >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO JUST TO TAKE PIECES OF THIS IN PARTICULAR ORDER, THE FEASIBILITY IS FEASIBILITY. THAT RECOMMENDATION PRO OR CON, IT'S DELIBERATELY FRAMED AS ASSUME THAT IT'S GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED OR IF YOU'RE ASKED TO IMPLEMENT IT AND TELL US WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE, CAN IT BE IMPLEMENTED, DO YOU KNOW HOW, WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOU GOT THIS AS AN ORDER, SAY. I LISTENED VERY CLOSELY TO THEIR CHOICE OF WORDS, AND THE KEY WORD THAT I HEARD WAS THAT THESE REVIEWS HAVE UNIQUE STATUS. AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT NOT TO GET INTO UNINTENTIONAL IRONY OR HUMOR, IT'S A QUESTION OF WHAT "UNIQUE" MEANS. UNIQUE DOES NOT NECESSARILY, TO MY VOCABULARY, MEAN THAT IT HAS AUTOMATIC OR -- THERE'S PROBABLY BETTER WORDS, THAT THAT BECOMES LAW JUST BECAUSE IT COMES OUT OF THE REVIEW TEAM. THAT WOULD BE A TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY THAT I THINK IT WAS -- IS REALLY OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE AND WHAT'S APPROPRIATE. SO THERE IS A NECESSARY STEP WITH A STRONG WEIGHT GIVEN TO THE UNIQUE ROLE OF THESE REVIEWS. AND A QUITE OBVIOUS REQUIREMENT THAT SHOULD WE CHOOSE NOT TO ACCEPT ONE OR MORE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OR TO MODIFY THEM THEN THE BURDEN IS ON US TO EXPLAIN WHY AND TO MAKE THAT A COMPELLING ARGUMENT. AND I SAY ALL OF THAT WITHOUT HAVING A PRECONCEPTION IN MY MIND ABOUT ANY OF THESE BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO SIT DOWN AND READ IT. BUT FROM A PROCESS POINTED OF VIEW AND THESE ARE VIEWS FORMED NOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WHOIS IN PARTICULAR, BUT WATCHING NOT ONLY THESE REVIEWS BUT EXPERT REPORTS OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, THERE IS A NECESSARY COMPONENT OF HAVING SOME CHECK AND BALANCE AND SOME TENSIONS IN THIS PROCESS. SUBJECT PERHAPS TO A LONGER DISCUSSION, BUT I WANTED TO BE AS CLEAR AS I CAN ABOUT THIS. >>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU. THEN I THINK IT'S -- IT'S MARILYN CADE AGAIN. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO REFLECT BACK TO YOU OUR UNDERSTANDING AS THE BC. THIS REVIEW TEAM SELECTED A DECISIONAL PROCESS TO WORK BY CONSENSUS. IT WOULD BE IN OUR VIEW BY DOING THAT THEY PERHAPS NEGOTIATED AWAY SOME RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH FULL AGREEMENT COULD NOT BE GAINED ON. THEY AGREED TO WORK BY CONSENSUS. AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE A SERIES OF REVIEW TEAMS AS WE ALL KNOW AND THEY'RE GOING TO OCCUR ON A REGULAR BASIS. IF THEY DO NOT HAVE -- IF WE DO NOT HAVE, AS A COMMUNITY, THE ASSURANCE THAT THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT THEY WILL -- THE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE IMPLEMENTED, I THINK WE ARE SOON GOING TO FIND IT VERY CHALLENGING TO FIND COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE WILLING TO DEDICATE THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME TO WORK IN A PROCESS WHICH IS AN OVERLAY PROCESS ON THE REST OF THE WORK THAT WE DO. >>STEVE CROCKER: SO YOU MAKE A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT POINT. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS WORK BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND THAT IT -- AND THAT IT HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT, NOT ONLY OF IMPROVING OUR SYSTEMS BUT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ENGAGED THAT THEIR WORK IS WORTHWHILE. AND I THINK WE'RE IN STRONG AGREEMENT ON THAT. EQUALLY -- AND TWO MORE POINTS THAT I THINK I WANT TO -- I WANT TO RAISE UP FROM WHAT YOU'VE SAID AND EMPHASIZE, THE -- THE WORK WITHIN THE REVIEW TEAMS TO CHOOSE WHAT THE BALANCE IS AND TO DO A LOT OF THAT NEGOTIATION GOES A VERY LONG WAY TOWARD MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION VERY LIKELY TO SUCCEED. AND SO THAT PROCESS IS A HEALTHY PROCESS. AND FROM WHERE I'M SITTING THE MORE OF THAT THAT'S DONE, THE BETTER IT IS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AND THE EASIER IT IS TO ACCEPT THAT. THAT GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO BUT NOT OVER THE LINE OF THEREFORE IT MUST BE SO JUST BECAUSE THAT WELL INTENTIONED AND WELL ORGANIZED GROUP HAS DONE THAT. BUT IT INCREASES THE LIKELIHOOD TREMENDOUSLY AND IS EXTREMELY WELCOMED AND PUTS US IN A COMFORTABLE POSITION TO BE ALIGNED.

2 1