- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

ALERTS from the Secretariat: ICANN News Alert -- Uniform Rapid Suspension Procedure and Rules
by Benedetta Rossi March 8, 2013

March 8, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below an ICANN Announcement regarding the Uniform Rapid Suspension Procedure & Rules. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org ICANN News Alert ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-05mar13-en.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Uniform Rapid Suspension Procedure and Rules 5 March 2013 An updated version of the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) Procedure <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs/procedure-01mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 168 KB] and the URS Rules are now available for download. The URS is one of several new Rights Protection Mechanisms available in the New gTLD Program. It complements the existing UDRP by offering a lower-cost, faster path to relief for rights holders experiencing the most clear-cut cases of infringement. The URS Procedure defines the URS claims process. The Rules will help service providers implement URS in a consistent manner. Since the last URS Procedure was posted on 4 June 2012, minor revisions have been made in the present rather than future tense. Other revisions clarify and simplify some provisions as well as make minor typographical corrections. Also, a set of Rules <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs/rules-04mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 82 KB] has been developed and added, similar to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) rules, to provide guidance on all aspects of the URS proceedings. In addition to the Rules posted by ICANN, each URS service provider is expected to produce supplemental rules to help standardize conduct for that provider's interactions with complainants and respondents, but that are not inconsistent with the Procedure or the Rules. The URS was developed by the community, for the community and is another testament to the multistakeholder model. Download the URS Procedure <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs/procedure-01mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 168 KB] and Rules <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs/rules-04mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 82 KB]. Learn more about Uniform Rapid Suspension <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/urs>. This message was sent to bc-secretariat(a)icann.org from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by iContact - Try It Free! <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=23976196&l=6333&s=AJLG&m=90…>

1 0

ALERTS from the Secretariat: FY14 Community Travel Support Guidelines
by Benedetta Rossi March 8, 2013

March 8, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below an ICANN announcement regarding the FY14 Community Travel Support Guidelines. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/travel-support-07mar13-en.htm FY14 Community Travel Support Guidelines Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 7 March 2013 Comment Close Date: 21 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 22 April 2013 Reply Close Date: 11 June 2013 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement <https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-07mar13-en.htm> To Submit Your Comments (Forum) <mailto:comments-travel-support-07mar13@icann.org> View Comments Submitted <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-travel-support-07mar13/> Brief Overview Originating Organization: ICANN Travel Support Categories/Tags: * Operations-Finances Purpose (Brief): Review and comment on FY14 community travel support guidelines Current Status: In review Next Steps: Community comment Staff Contact: Diane Schroeder, Director Administration Email Staff Contact <mailto:diane.schroeder@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20FY14%20Community%20Travel%20Support%20Guidelines%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: FY14 community member travel support guidelines (draft). Purpose is to give community members an opportunity to comment on or ask questions about community travel support process and guidelines. Section II: Background: Every year in advance of the new fiscal year budget, community members are invited to review and comment upon draft travel support guidelines. Section III: Document and Resource Links: Draft FY14 Community Travel Support Guidelines <https://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/travel-support/draft-travel-support-…>[PDF, 525 KB] Section IV: Additional Information: None ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ALERTS From the Secretariat: Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP
by Benedetta Rossi March 8, 2013

March 8, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below an ICANN announcement regarding the Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP. Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/pdp-suspension-07mar13-en.htm Proposed Modification of GNSO PDP Manual to Address the Suspension of a PDP Comment / Reply Periods (*) Comment Open Date: 7 March 2013 Comment Close Date: 6 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC Reply Open Date: 7 April 2013 Reply Close Date: 28 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC Important Information Links Public Comment Announcement <https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-07mar13-en.htm> To Submit Your Comments (Forum) <mailto:comments-pdp-suspension-07mar13@icann.org> View Comments Submitted <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-pdp-suspension-07mar13/> Brief Overview Originating Organization: Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Categories/Tags: * Policy Processes * Reviews/Improvements Purpose (Brief): The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) is recommending a modification of the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) Manual, which is an integral part of the GNSO Operating Procedures, to address the possible termination or suspension of a PDP. Current Status: As required by the ICANN Bylaws, a public comment forum is hereby initiated on the proposed changes prior to GNSO Council consideration. Next Steps: Following the closing of the public comment forum, the SCI will review the comments received; revise its recommendations, if deemed appropriate, and; submit these to the GNSO Council for approval Staff Contact: Julie Hedlund Email Staff Contact <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Proposed%20Modification%20of%20GNSO%20PDP%20Manual%20to%20Address%20the%20Suspension%20of%20a%20PDP%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose: Having encountered the need to suspend a PDP for a limited amount of time, the GNSO Council realized that currently the Policy Development Process (PDP) Manual does not contain a specific provision on how to deal with such a situation. As a result, the GNSO Council requested the SCI in April 2012 to review whether there should be a modification to the GNSO PDP (PDP) Manual to address the possible suspension of a PDP following its initiation. After reaching consensus the SCI opened a public comment period <https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gnso-pdp-manual-22oct12-en.htm>on 22 October 2012 on proposed modifications to the PDP Manual. Upon the close of that period on 03 December 2013, the SCI further deliberated on the procedures and reached consensus on further modifications to the PDP Manual to address termination and suspension of a PDP. These proposed modifications to the existing provision on terminating a PDP (section 15) are as follows, with additions in bold and deletions stricken: /The GNSO Council may terminate /*/or suspend/*/* a PDP prior to the publication of a Final Report only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a Supermajority Vote in favour of termination /*/or suspension./*/The following are illustrative examples of possible reasons for a premature termination /*/or suspension/*/of a PDP:/ 1. */_Deadlock_/*/. The PDP Team is hopelessly deadlocked and unable to identify recommendations or statements that have either the strong support or a consensus of its members despite significant time and resources being dedicated to the PDP;/ 2. */_Changing Circumstances_/*/. Events have occurred since the initiation of the PDP that have rendered the PDP moot,/*//*/or no longer necessary/*/; or warranting a suspension;/*/or/ 3. */_Lack of Community Volunteers_/*/. Despite several calls for participation, the work of the PDP Team is significantly impaired and unable to effectively conclude its deliberations due to lack of volunteer participation./ /*In the case of a proposed termination of a PDP prior to the issuance of a Final Report or suspension of a PDP upon the recommendation of the PDP Team, the GNSO liaison to the PDP Team shall promptly submit to the Council a written Termination Summary or Suspension Summary specifying the reasons for the recommended action to be taken and, if applicable, the points of view represented in the PDP Team and the consensus status (as defined by the GNSO Working Group Guidelines) at the time such action is recommended. In the event that no PDP Team has been formed or there is no recommendation from the PDP Team for a proposed termination or suspension by the GNSO Council, any GNSO Council member may propose termination or suspension of a PDP. In the case of such a proposal, the GNSO Council will publicly specify the reasons for the recommended action and will conduct a public comment forum on the proposed termination or suspension prior to conducting the vote.*/ /*Upon the request of any Council Member, Advisory Committee or the ICANN Board, the GNSO Council will prepare a formal report on the proposed termination or suspension of a PDP outlining the reasons for the proposed action, current status of the PDP and expected next steps, if any.*/ /**Suspension is a stated time interval during which there is a temporary cessation of the PDP, i.e. all activities are temporarily halted upon a decision of the GNSO Council. A mere change in milestones or schedule of the PDP is not considered a suspension.*/ As required by the ICANN Bylaws, the SCI is requesting community input on these proposed modifications to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Section II: Background: The Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) was established by the GNSO Council on 7 April 2011 to be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC) and Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and approved by the GNSO Council. For further information about the SCI and its activities, please see https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosci/Home. Section III: Document and Resource Links: Current version of the GNSO PDP Manual -- see http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-2-pdp-manual-16dec11-en.pdf[PDF, 126 KB]. Section IV: Additional Information: Not applicable ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Beijing Meeting Attendees
by Benedetta Rossi March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear BC Members, In preparation for the upcoming ICANN meeting in Beijing, can you please let me know if you are planning on attending, and if so provide me with the following information: * Arrival/departure dates * Hotel name * Extra guests * Contact details on site Please let me know as soon as possible so I can draft a list of BC attendees in preparation for events and meetings taking place in Beijing. 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

ALERTS from the Secretariat: Draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 14 March 2013 at 15:00 UTC
by Benedetta Rossi March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below the draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting taking place on the 14th of March 2013 at 3 pm UTC. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org *Please find the draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 14 March 2013 at 15:00 UTC. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+14+March+201… This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. _Meeting Times 15:00 UTC <http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> _*http://tinyurl.com/czfwutj* Coordinated Universal Time 15:00 UTC 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 15:00 London; 16:00 Paris; 04:00 Wellington Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. *GNSO Council meeting audio cast * *http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u* *_Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)_* 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates Jonathan Robinson https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Jonathan+Robinson+SOI 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of _minutes for the Council meeting on 14 February 2013 <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg14260.html>_ approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures on1 March 2013. *_Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes)_* Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include brief review of Projects List <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> *_Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)_* Confirmation of James Bladel and Mikey O'Connor as the co-chairs of the IRTP Part D PDP Working Group. *__* *_Item 4: UPDATE & DISCUSSION_*_-- *Policy vs. Implementation (15 minutes)*_ Recent issues highlight an ongoing broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset. In addition, the Council is increasingly asked to consider issues for policy guidance and may well need to look at the evolution of its own work and processes to accommodate this type of request. Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j…> that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic. Further community discussion will take place in Beijing and the inclusion of this agenda item here serves to keep the issue on the agenda of the Council in the interim. 8.1 Discussion 8.2 Next steps *__* *_Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - _**_Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study_**_(10 minutes) _*__ At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey <http://toronto45.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/presentation-whois-survey-1…> that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services. The Council discussed this at its 14 February 2013 meeting but did not reach a firm conclusion. Some expressed concern about going ahead with the study now, when a lot of other Whois activities are going on, while others appeared to support moving forward as the study could result in data that would help inform ongoing Whois activities. One possible way forward is that staff is asked to go ahead with the RFP for this work and then report back to the Council before going ahead with the study? In this way, some of the preparatory work could be done, which would allow us to move forward quickly if/when the Council decides to move ahead.__ 9.1 -- Update as necessary 9.2 -- Discussion 9.3 -- Next steps *_ _* *_Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION -- _**_Planning for Beijing_**_(30 minutes) _*__ Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning. GNSO Council VC Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council now has the opportunity to discuss plans and provide feedback. Included in this item will be the opportunity to shape the topics and substance of the Council's proposed meetings with other groups in Beijing such as the CCNSO, the GAC and the ICANN board. 10.1 -- Update (Mason Cole) 10.2 -- Discussion 10.3 -- Next steps *_Item 11: Any Other Business (5 minutes) _* ** *Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X,**Section 3) *9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:** a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA>): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation. i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded. k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House." *Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (**GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4 <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>**) *4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 15:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+1DST 08:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 11:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 12:00 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 15:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 15:00 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 17:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 20:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China _(HKT_ ) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Perth, Australia (WST <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 04:00 -- next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions - DST starts on 10 March 2013 in USA) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com* http://tinyurl.com/czfwutj* Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

ALERTS: New Deadline - Call for Applicants for the Meeting Strategy Working Group: Friday 8 March 2013 - 23:59 UTC
by Benedetta Rossi March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below an ICANN announcement regarding a new deadline for the submission of application for the Meeting Strategy Working Group, now moved to Friday, March 8, 2013. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-04mar13-en.htm New Deadline - Call for Applicants for the Meeting Strategy Working Group: Friday 8 March 2013 - 23:59 UTC 4 March 2013 In line with the Board resolution <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-02feb13-en.htm#2…>adopted on February the 2nd 2013, ICANN invited interested individuals to apply for Volunteer Member positions -- either in representation of a Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee -- to serve on the Meeting Strategy Working Group. The mandate and mission of the Meeting Strategy Working Group as defined in the MSWG Charter <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/charter> is as follows: to discuss and propose strategy for the structure, purpose and locations for ICANN Public Meetings and conferences, starting in 2015. We thank those applicants who already have submitted applications. In order to give more time for more members from the wider community to apply, we are extending the deadline for this call for applicants to Friday 8 March 2013 -- 23:59 UTC. Candidatures are to be submitted to mswgcandidatures(a)icann.org <mailto:mswgcandidatures@icann.org> More information * Call for Applicants <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/call-for-volunteers…> * Charter <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/participation/mswg/charter> Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

3 5

WHOIS Registration Identification Study Webinar Notes
by Chris Chaplow March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

WHOIS Registration Identification Study Webinar - Notes for BC 6th March 2013 19.00 UTC Report is open for public comment http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/whois-regid-15feb13-en.htm Close 9th March 6, 2013 Reply Close 31 March There is only one comment at present. Webinar Intro by Barbara Roseman Presenter Edward Mulrow of Chigago University. Sample of 1600 domains from .com, .net, .org, info, biz with good statistical properties. (Sample of 400 will provide good stat results, so 1600 chosen as we knew there would be sub groups) Data collected by auto tool bot written called NORC-BOT in Python ICANN ran a parallel collection. All on one day in March 2012. Only www and ww2 sub-domains checked for content. Domain user is apparent user and relation to registrant Domain Content - noted if potentially harmful. Registrant classified into: Natural Person, 39% Legal Person, 33% Privacy / Proxy 20% Unclassified.(data missing, patently false, pending deletion) 8% Apparent Domain User: Legal Person, 37% No content 26% Parked 21% Unknown 12% Natural Person, 5% User to Registrant relation Undetermined 55% Proxy Privacy 20% Same 17% Employer/ee 5% Customer Other 3% 23% of domains with comercial user registered for privacy/proxy 55% we could not determine content user to registrant. This was exploratory first study only. Any questions can be asked in the public forum. Call Questions. Steve Metalitz: QUESTION: If an apparent natural person registers mutliple domain names, is the registrant treated as a legal person? Or was reverse whois run only if the registrant type was not clear? Michael Jugovich: @steve metalitz: reverse whois was one of the variables considered, generally users with large numbers of domains were considered legal persons, however, this can not be a generalized statement applied to all instances of coding. Jennifer Sime: QUESTION: Does a privacy/proxy service entity essentially mean that they could potentially be a natural or legal person but it's undetermined because they went through a proxy, or am I missing the mark entirely Steven Pedlow: Answer to Jennifer: Registrant is spearate from Domain User. Yes, this slide makes the distinction clear. Chris Chaplow: Is a marketing name of micro business considered Legal person or natural Person? Michael Jugovich: @Chris Chaplow: as the name referes to a business it would be considered a legal person Avri Doria: QUESTION: Knowing NORC data from a previous life time, I am wondering whether the analysis could have differentiated between commercial and non commercial legal persons. Also wondering whether data was collected on whether organizations were engaged in public service, such as women's shelters or human rights advocacy offices. John McCormac - HosterStats.com: QUESTION Were the domains randomly sampled over the TLDs or was any adjustment made for different usage development in TLDS outside .com? Steven Pedlow: Answer to John: the domains were randomly sampled within gTLD. Chris Chaplow Managing Director Andalucia.com S.L. Avenida del Carmen 9 Ed. Puertosol, Puerto Deportivo 1ª Planta, Oficina 30 Estepona, 29680 Malaga, Spain Tel: + (34) 952 897 865 Fax: + (34) 952 897 874 E-mail: <mailto:chris@andalucia.com> chris(a)andalucia.com Web: <http://www.andalucia.com/> www.andalucia.com Information about Andalucia, Spain.

1 0

ALERTS from the Secretariat: Reminder: Whois Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation
by Benedetta Rossi March 5, 2013

March 5, 2013

Dear BC Members, Please find below an ICANN announcement regarding the WHOIS Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation. If you wish to attend this webinar, please follow the RSVP details outlined in the announcement below. Thank you, Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-04mar13-en.htm Whois Registrant ID Study Webinar Invitation 4 March 2013 You are invited to a review of the findings of the Registrant ID Study Draft Report, recently published for public comment. The authors of the report (NORC) and ICANN Policy Staff will provide a briefing on Wednesday 6 March at 12.00 UTC and Wednesday 6 March at 19.00 UTC to summarize the findings from the WHOIS Registrant ID Study. The webinar will cover the methodology used to compile the data and provide an analysis of the findings. The two sessions will be identical, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run 90 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. Participants also will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, a recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff always is available to answer questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, Wednesday at 12.00 UTC or Wednesday at 19.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html) We will send you an email reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Update: Contention sets for new gTLDs
by Steve DelBianco March 2, 2013

March 2, 2013

Wanted you all to see this. I think it will reflect poorly on ICANN's expansion of TLDs. ICANN hired an international expert panel to scour 1900 new TLD strings and determine which were confusingly similar, so they could be combines in the same contention set. This is to ensure we don't delegate 2 TLD strings that would confuse Internet users because they are too similar. I expected, for example, that the applications received for .hotel and .hotels would be in the same contention set, since it would be confusing for users to have both TLDs out there. (It would increase the cost of defensive registrations, too, since hotels would have to buy domains in both TLDs. ) After several months of careful study, ICANN's experts published their contention sets yesterday. (link<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm>) They "identified" 230 "exact match contention sets" where multiple applicants sought the exact same string. And they found just 2 "non-exact match contention sets" (unicom and unicorm; hoteis and hotels ) Unbelievably, they did not consider the singular and plural versions of key words to be confusingly similar. This means we will get new TLDs for both the singular and plural versions of keywords such as: ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANTS AUTO AUTOS CAR CARS CAREER CAREERS COUPON COUPONS CRUISE CRUISES DEAL DEALS FAN FANS GAME GAMES GIFT GIFTS HOME HOMES HOTEL HOTELS HOTEL HOTELES KID KIDS LOAN LOANS MARKET MARKETS NEW NEWS PET PETS PHOTO PHOTOS REVIEW REVIEWS SPORT SPORTS TOUR TOURS WEB WEBS WORK WORKS What are the implications for applicants? Well, let's take an example. The 2 Applicants for .GIFT just got a huge gift from ICANN when they were not placed in the same contention set as the 2 applicants for .GIFTS One of the 2 .GIFT guys must prevail in their "singular" contention set. They can then proceed to delegation, as they planned. Or they can negotiate to be bought-out by the winning applicant from the plural contention set ( .GIFTS ). In other words, many applicants dodged a bullet by escaping from contention with their singular/plural form competitors. My guess is they want to explore ways to monetize their good fortune. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

5 4

SO/AC survey to be sent to Constituencies/SOs
by Benedetta Rossi March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013 ICANN is taking steps to try to better understand views across the community. Please see the invitation from ICANN for an online survey regarding some areas of strong interest to business users. This survey is partly an outcome from the feedback that occured to ICANN during the Intercessional planning session of the Non Contracted Parties House, where the CSG ExComm members all supported the need for ICANN to ask the broader community of ICANN, not just outsiders about ICANN's reputation. The ExComm encourages all BC members to participate in this online survey. It is an excellent opportunity to provide direct feedback to ICANN. You may wish to also discuss this survey as a BC via the bc online list. Transmitted by the BC Secretariat on behalf of the BC ExComm --------------------------- Dear All, As ICANN operates on a multi-stakeholder model, we are committed to ensuring that we maintain a dialogue with the ICANN community. Of particular importance are the opinions of the members of ICANN's Support Organizations and Advisory Committees as they represent a unique perspective on ICANN. To that end, we have partnered with Echo Research, an independent, global research organization, to survey our stakeholders to gather perceptions of ICANN including their knowledge of the organization and their opinions surrounding several aspects of its reputation and communications. The research is in the form of an online survey that will take approximately 10 minutes of your time to complete. Be assured that the survey is hosted on Echo's secure server and conducted under the Code of Conduct of the Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO), which ensures your confidentiality Please click on the link below to participate in this important research effort: http://www.youropinionsmatter.com/E0083/ We know time is scarce these days, but we would appreciate if it you would consider participating and sharing your feedback. Thank you in advance for your input. Sincerely, Jennifer Cluffo Clark Research Director ICANN -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat(a)icann.org

1 0