- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

FILED: BC comment on release of geo-names in several new gTLD registry agreements
by Steve DelBianco June 14, 2015

June 14, 2015

Today we filed 2 more comments on release of geo-names in new gTLD registry agreements: .SONY, .ARCHI, .BIO and .SAARLAND new gTLD registry agreements (link<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BC-comment-on-Release-of…>) .KOMATSU and .RICOH new gTLD registry agreements (link<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/comment-on-proposed-amen…>) Thanks again to Andy Abrams for drafting.

1 0

FILED: Business Constituency (BC) comment on Registry Stakeholder Group charter amendments
by Steve DelBianco June 14, 2015

June 14, 2015

We filed our comment on Registry Stakeholder Group charter amendments today. (here<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BC-comment-on-RySG-chart…> and below) Thanks again to J Scott for drafting. Date: Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 3:43 PM To: "comments-rysg-amend-08may15(a)icann.org<mailto:comments-rysg-amend-08may15@icann.org>" Subject: Business Constituency (BC) comment on Registry Stakeholder Group charter amendments The Business Constituency (“BC”) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments to the proposed amendments to the Registry Stakeholder Group (“RySG") Charter posted for public comment on May 8, 2015 (<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rysg-charter-amendments-2015-05-08-en.>link<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rysg-charter-amendments-2015-05-08-en>) In its proposed amendments, the RySG is making several adjustments to its Charter in order to in increase the efficiency of operating the group. The BC believes that these amendments will assist the RySG in avoiding delays in its decision-making process. Additionally, the BC believes that the proposed amendments clarify the Observer status and the purpose of Interest Groups within the RySG. However, the BC is concerned that the RySG continues to ignore recognition of non-retail registries as a separate constituency from the retail registries. Similarly, the BC believes that the RySG should have taken a serious look at eliminating the weighted voting procedure outlined in the RySG Charter. The BC is mindful that one of the primary purposes of ICANN and the new gTLD program itself was to provide more choice for consumers as a benefit for the greater public interest. The BC believes that a failure to allow for the formation of voting constituencies and the weighted voting provisions (even if only optional) will continue to allow RySG policy positions to be dominated by those registries with a for-profit, retail registry business model, to the disadvantage of smaller, non-retail oriented registries. The BC believes that the failure to create a system that puts all registry business models on parity with the legacy registry business models is a serious flaw in the proposed amendments. Notwithstanding these reservations, the BC supports the proposed revisions, but it strongly urges the Board to request that the RySG consider further revisions to address these serious issues in the very near future. — These comments were drafted by J Scott Evans and approved in accordance with our charter

1 0

54 public comments on the CCWG proposal for ICANN Accountability
by Steve DelBianco June 4, 2015

June 4, 2015

54 comments were submitted on the CCWG proposal for enhancing ICANN accountability. (link<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20…> to comment page) All comments are listed here<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778556>. At bottom of that page is a "Download All” option, too. ICANN staff and CCWG members are reviewing comments already, and we should have a categorized list of questions/support/concerns by 16-Jun. —Steve

1 0

FILED: BC comment on CCWG proposal for enhancing ICANN accountability
by Steve DelBianco June 3, 2015

June 3, 2015

Today we filed our comment on the Proposal from the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ‭ICANN‬ Accountability (CCWG-Accountability)‬‬‬‬. See attachment or this link <http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BC-on-CCWG-Proposal.pdf> on the BC page. Thanks to Aparna Sridhar, Andrew Harris, Chris Wilson, Claudia Selli, and other members of the BC who contributed. This is a very substantive comment that puts forth specific recommendations for improving the CCWG proposal. —Steve

1 0

US FTC Chair responds to ICANN letter on .SUCKS
by Steve DelBianco May 28, 2015

May 28, 2015

Here is the response from US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to ICANN’s letter regarding .SUCKS No action taken, but an investigation might be underway — they can't comment on active investigations. FTC says “it appears that Vox Populi and perhaps other registries may be violating the spirit, even if not the letter, of [RPMs]” FTC reiterates many of the recommendations they made in the past that ICANN did not follow. Including in the area of verifying credentials of registrants in highly regulated markets. FTC says its imperative that ICANN review all these issues in order to improve any future offering of gTLDs.

1 0

Upcoming Pre-ICANN 53 Policy Update Webinar
by Yolande Jimenez May 22, 2015

May 22, 2015

Dear BC Members, Please find below the ICANN announcement for the upcoming Pre-ICANN 53 Policy Update Webinar taking place on 11 June 2015 at 10 UTC and 19 UTC. If you would like to join one of the sessions, please follow the RSVP instructions included on the announcement. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thank you. Kind regards, Yolanda Jimenez Secretariat Support, BC/IPC/ISPCP Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: yolande.jimenez(a)icann.org<mailto:Yolande.jimenez@icann.org> Mobile (33) 6 03 58 88 91 Skype: yolande.jimenez.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> ------ https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-21-en Please RSVP via this form<http://goo.gl/forms/9aFRqckV0e> by 5 June 2015. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 8 June 2015. The ICANN Policy Development Support Team will provide a Policy Update Webinar on Thursday, 11 June 2015 at 10:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC, summarizing policy activities across the ICANN policy development community and the ongoing Transition of Stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions and the ICANN Accountability efforts. Updates will also be provided on topics from ICANN's Support Organizations and Advisory Committees: * Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and Regional Internet Registries (RIR) Activities * Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Policy and Implementation Working Group Final Report * GNSO Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues Working Group Initial Report * GNSO Translation & Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group Final Report * Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Framework of Interpretation Working Group Recommendations * At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and Regional At-Large Organizations (RALO) Activities * Government Advisory Committee's (GAC) Update on Country Names Protection * Government Advisory Committee's (GAC) Update on Human Rights and Underserved Regions * GAC's Implementation of the Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team's (ATRT2) Recommendations * GAC Advice on new gTLD Safeguards * Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Recent Publications * Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Caucus Work Party Update * Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Advisory on the Use of Static TLD/suffix lists * Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Activity Update The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session runs for 90 minutes and will be conducted in English. The webinar will be conducted in Adobe Connect along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. The slides and transcript of the session will be translated into Spanish. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function in Adobe Connect. Recordings of the webinars will be made available. The Policy Development Support Team is always available to answer any questions via email at policyinfo(a)icann.org<mailto:policyinfo@icann.org>. Please RSVP via this form<http://goo.gl/forms/9aFRqckV0e> by 5 June 2015. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 8 June 2015.

2 1

FILED: Business Constituency comment on 2nd draft proposal of CWG on IANA naming related functions
by Steve DelBianco May 21, 2015

May 21, 2015

Filed this<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/BC-on-CWG-2nd-Draft-Prop…> comment tonight. Thanks to Aparna Sridhar, Claudia Selli, Andrew Harris, Ellen Blackler, Stephen Coates, and several other BC members who contributed.

1 0

FILED: BC comment on IRTP Part C Recommendations
by Steve DelBianco May 18, 2015

May 18, 2015

We filed these<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Comment-on-IRTP-Part-C.p…> comments on IRTP Part C recommendations over the weekend. Thanks again to Susan Kawaguchi for drafting the comment.

2 1

BC letters sent to ICANN and to US and Canada consumer protection authorities
by Steve DelBianco May 8, 2015

May 8, 2015

These two letters are now posted on the BC website: Letter to ICANN regarding .sucks gTLD policies<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Letter-to-ICANN-dotSucks…> Letter to US and Canada Consumer Protection Authorities, regarding .sucks gTLD policies<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Letter-to-FTC-and-OCA-do…>

2 1

published for public comment: CCWG draft proposal for enhancing ICANN accountability
by Steve DelBianco May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

Tonight the CCWG has published a draft proposal to enhance ICANN accountability once the IANA contract is no longer there. The public comment page is here<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20…> and the draft proposal is here<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cwg-accountability-draft-propos…>. You’ll recognize many of the proposed community powers and stress tests, since they were proposed almost a year ago by the BC. (link<http://www.bizconst.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/BC-reply-comment-on-Enha…>) The CCWG has a list of 15 structured questions to guide public comment. As your rep on CCWG I will draft preliminary answers for BC member consideration. But I suggest all BC members review the proposal. Comment period ends 3-Jun. —Steve

1 0