- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

Anzaja: resignation
by Liz Williams Feb. 5, 2010

Feb. 5, 2010

Dear colleagues There is little point in being part of an organisation so dominated by US based interests. There is nought to congratulate ourselves about being so clearly dominated by one particular group when there are such broader issues at stake. We have failed substantially to meet our charter obligations and the new executive committee will have a large task on its hands to ensure a fresh and innovative approach to representing business interests across the board. I have asked Gary to remove me from BC membership with immediate effect. Liz

4 6

Executive Committee Elections
by BC Secretariat Feb. 5, 2010

Feb. 5, 2010

Dear Members Voting for the Executive Committee elections closed at midnight yesterday. I can announce that the candidates received the following weighted votes. CHAIR Marilyn Cade 34 votes Phil Lodico 33 votes CSG REPRESENTATIVE Sarah Deutsch 38 votes Liz Williams 31 votes 32 members voted for Chair representing a 76% turnout 32 members voted for CSG representing a 76% turnout A total of 35 members returned ballots representing a 83% turnout. Many thanks to all candidates and to those members who voted in the election. Gary Hills

2 1

Resend: Voting final reminder
by BC Secretariat Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

My earlier mail hasn't appeared in the archive, so this is a resend. Please see below Best wishes Gary _____ From: BC Secretariat Sent: 04 February 2010 13:44 To: bc-gnso(a)icann.org Subject: [bc-gnso] Voting final reminder Dear Members A final reminder that voting for the Exective Committee elections ends at midnight in your time zone today, Thursday 4 February. Please ensure that your votes reach me before then. Votes received after this time cannot be counted. Many thanks to those members who have already voted. Best wishes Gary

1 0

Voting final reminder
by BC Secretariat Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

Dear Members A final reminder that voting for the Exective Committee elections ends at midnight in your time zone today, Thursday 4 February. Please ensure that your votes reach me before then. Votes received after this time cannot be counted. Many thanks to those members who have already voted. Best wishes Gary

1 0

Executive Committee Elections - Chair and CSG
by BC Secretariat Feb. 3, 2010

Feb. 3, 2010

Dear Members A reminder that voting for the the Executive Committee elections closes at midnight tomorrow, Thursday 4 February. Please let me know if you would like me to send you another ballot form. Best wishes Gary

1 0

FW: PDP re Vertical Integration of Registrars & Registries
by Mike Rodenbaugh Feb. 2, 2010

Feb. 2, 2010

The GNSO Council has voted to move forward with a PDP on vertical integration. The Resolution is below. I introduced the original motion, which had been drafted by Margie Milam of Staff. The text voted upon was written by Mary Wong, and was accepted by me as a friendly amendment on the last day. This is consistent with the BC's position on this issue. It is hoped that Staff will agree with our position, that the 'status quo' should remain as in the com/net/org contracts for the new TLD registry contracts, unless and until policy is developed by the Council and adopted by the Board - rather than imposed by Staff. If so, then policy could develop to loosen the restrictions later, or keep them the same. If they loosen the restrictions now, and later policy is developed or desired which would tighten them, then it seemingly would be very difficult to implement. That would be bad precedent, and we won't know for years whether it is bad policy. Notably, the entire Contracted Party House voted against a PDP. I understand that many are happy with the Staff recommendation for newTLDs, and many fear delay to the new TLD program. In our house, the vote was 11-2 in favor. The motion passed because it had more than 66% of votes in our House in favor. (The ISPs were the two votes against.) Because of absentee voting, the vote has just become final. I need to post by the 9th the names of any volunteers to the drafting team that will draft the WG charter. Please send me your name if you're interested. If no other volunteers, then I can work on the charter drafting team, but we really need other volunteers to participate actively in the Working Group that will be chartered to complete its work within sixteen weeks. So, please help if you can. Thanks! -*- Whereas, on 24 September 2009, the GNSO Council requested ICANN Staff to prepare an Issues Report on the topic of vertical integration between registries and registrars; Whereas, on 11 December 2009, the Issues Report on vertical integration between registries and registrars was delivered to the GNSO Council; Whereas, the Issues Report includes recommendations that the GNSO Council delay the initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the issue for a period of 1-2 years; Whereas, notwithstanding the recommendations in the Issues Report, the GNSO Council has decided to initiate a PDP on vertical integration between registries and registrars; and Whereas, the GNSO Council has decided against initiating a Task Force as defined in the ICANN Bylaws; Now therefore, be it: RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council has reviewed the recommendations contained in the Issues Report, and nonetheless approves the initiation of a PDP on the topic of vertical integration between registries and registrars; FURTHER RESOLVED, that the PDP shall evaluate which policy recommendations, if any, should be developed on the topic of vertical integration between registrars and registries affecting both new gTLDs and existing gTLDs, as may be possible under existing contracts and as allowed under the ICANN Bylaws; FURTHER RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council shall convene a Working Group to fulfill the requirements of the PDP, including a review of ICANN Staff's prior work with respect to vertical integration, and develop recommendations accordingly; and FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Working Group shall deliver its Final Report to the GNSO Council no later than sixteen weeks from the date of this resolution. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/>

3 2

ICANN call re Nairobi meeting security
by Marilyn Cade Feb. 1, 2010

Feb. 1, 2010

Just finally found details re one of two calls ICANN is doing re security in Kenya. 3 pm EST. 1 800 550 6865 or 1 213 233 3193/access code 3856 I am personally interested. You may be as well. Marilyn Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

3 2

Supporting GAC concerns with EOI purpose and process
by Steve DelBianco Jan. 29, 2010

Jan. 29, 2010

There were only 4 positive replies when Philip and I proposed a BC comment, so we do not have sufficient consensus to just set aside our voting rules. Nothing has been filed for the Constituency as a whole. Let me encourage you to file individual comments as Philip and I have (see below) before the deadline tonight. -- Steve DelBianco ------ Forwarded Message Subject: NetChoice supports GAC concerns with EOI purpose and process NetChoice supports the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) suggestion regarding process: '...avoid taking a decision on the EoI at its February meeting and defer it until the next ICANN Public meeting'. ( see http://forum.icann.org/lists/draft-eoi-model/msg00191.html ) Before the ICANN Board votes on whether to proceed with the EOI, it should first resolve the ambiguity about what the EOI is designed to accomplish. Namely, is the EOI just a data gathering exercise, or is it a mandatory pre-registration for a specific string? Once we understand that threshold question, the community can then debate the details of the EOI plan during a brief public comment period followed by public discussions at the Nairobi meeting in March. For instance, if the EOI is only about gathering data, there's no need to publicize actual strings proposed by applicants who want their strings to be kept confidential. On the other hand, if the EOI is going to be a mandatory pre-registration, ICANN should finish the Applicant Guidebook and Registry Contract before asking applicants to file an EOI with a hefty fee. Finally, NetChoice respectfully disagrees with one complaint the GAC lodged with respect to process. In their comments, the GAC complained that 'no request has been made for GAC¹s opinion'. NetChoice encourages the GAC to assume that their opinion is always welcome, just like the opinion of any stakeholder in ICANN process development. To be an effective participant during the critical early stages of policy development, the GAC needs to engage in deliberations and working groups -- without waiting for a formal invitation. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482 About NetChoice: NetChoice is a coalition of e-Commerce businesses who share the goal of promoting convenience, choice and commerce on the Net. NetChoice members include AOL, eBay, Expedia, IAC, News Corporation, Overstock.com, VeriSign, Yahoo! and over 10,000 small online sellers. ------ End of Forwarded Message

3 2

Propose that the BC support GAC process comments on EOI
by Philip Sheppard Jan. 27, 2010

Jan. 27, 2010

The GAC have submitted a proposal on process. In effect it asks the Board to delay a decision until after debate in Nairobi. I would like to suggest that the BC supports this. Please let me have your opinion today as public comments close today ! --------------------------- The full text of the GAC advice is on the comments list but the specific process advice is as follows: "the GAC therefore advises the Board to: - avoid taking a decision on the EoI at its February meeting and defer it until the next ICANN Public meeting. A premature decision could trigger requests for reconsideration and further derail the discussion; - request that staff facilitate a full cross-community deliberation on the EoI at the next ICANN Public meeting, prior to any final decisions; and - ensure that the second summary of comments clearly documents the respective interests of respondents." Philip

9 10

Questions for candidates
by BC Secretariat Jan. 25, 2010

Jan. 25, 2010

Dear Members There is now an opportunity for you to ask questions to the candidates in the upcoming elections. - Please send any questions to me at the secretariat address, making it clear if the questions are for the Chair or CSG candidates - I will then collate all questions and forward them to the candidates - I will then ask the candidates to post their answers back to me for distribution to members - The same questions will be asked of both candidates in each election. For example, a question regarding the Chair position will be sent to both candidates for Chair. - Questions should be with me by close of business on Tuesday 26 January Many thanks and best wishes Gary

1 0