- Bc-gnso - lists.icann.org

Re: [bc-gnso] Nairobi is ON
by martinsutton＠hsbc.com Jan. 24, 2010

Jan. 24, 2010

I still aim to be there, arriving Friday and staying at the Hilton. Martin Martin Sutton Manager, Group Fraud Risk and Intelligence Ph: ++44 (0)20 7991 8074 Mob: ++44 (0)777 4556680 Sent from my BlackBerry ********************************* HSBC Holdings plc Registered Office: 8 Canada Square, London E14 5HQ, United Kingdom Registered in England number 617987 ********************************* ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike O'Connor" [mike(a)haven2.com] Sent: 22/01/2010 18:37 CST To: bc - GNSO list <bc-gnso(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nairobi is ON i'm arriving very late Thursday evening -- staying at the Safari Club. others? mikey On Jan 22, 2010, at 6:35 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote: > > Thanks, Mikey. > > I am confirmed to attend, arriving on Friday evening. > I'll be at the Hilton. If you haven't booked yet, it might be helpful to > share information about where BC attendees are staying. > > I circulated information earlier, based on the great insights from > our Kenyan member, regarding hotels close to the venue. > I can send that out directly to anyone who hasn't booked already, > if helpful. > > Marilyn Cade > > > > > > From: mike(a)haven2.com > > Subject: [bc-gnso] Nairobi is ON > > Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:01:10 -0600 > > To: bc-gnso(a)icann.org > > > > > > here's the announcement; > > > > http://blog.icann.org/2010/01/icann-remains-committed-to-nairobi-and-africa/ > > > > hope to see you there... > > > > mikey > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - > > phone 651-647-6109 > > fax 866-280-2356 > > web www.haven2.com > > handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.) > > - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.) ----------------------------------------- SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT! This E-mail is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the sender immediately by return E-mail. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely secure, error or virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions.

3 2

Nairobi is ON
by Mike O'Connor Jan. 23, 2010

Jan. 23, 2010

here's the announcement; http://blog.icann.org/2010/01/icann-remains-committed-to-nairobi-and-africa/ hope to see you there... mikey - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)

3 3

Nomination period closing
by BC Secretariat Jan. 22, 2010

Jan. 22, 2010

Dear Members A reminder that the extended nomination period for the Executive Committee elections closes at midnight, Thursday 21 January Best wishes Gary

4 3

TLD pre-registration
by Philip Sheppard Jan. 20, 2010

Jan. 20, 2010

This is out for consultation. The public comment period opens on 18 December 2009 and closes on 27 January 2010. Details at: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#draft-eoi <http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#draft-eoi> My draft initial comments are as follows. Comments ? If there is consensus / support I'd be happy to write something up as a BC position. Philip -------------------- We oppose the concept of pre-registration and expressions of interest (EOI) for the following reasons. 1. Distraction The EOI process should not distract ICANN from the fundamental task of addressing unresolved issues relating to new TLDs such as trade mark protection and malicious conduct. 2. A true pre-registration The proposed mandatory EOI process with a $55,000 fee is described as a pre-registration suggesting that it is not reversible regardless of the unresolved overarching issues such as trade mark protection and malicious conduct. 3. Inconsistency The principle of pre-registration is inconsistent with all previous ICANN practice. 4. Ignores market dynamics Brand owners may feel compelled to enter into an EOI purely for defensive reasons, so that they do not suffer when a speculator is given rights in their brand. There seems to be no facility to allow competition for the same domain names after pre-registration. Moreover, pre-registration may tip-off competitors to new business models prematurely. 5. A lower than market fee may encourage speculation Speculators may pay $55,000 to secure rights to certain domains instead of $185,000 in the hope of selling on. This is surely not the intent of ICANN's Board. 6. Applicants are forced to invest blind Because there are unresolved issues, the pre-registration model forces applications in ignorance of potential future costs. This is poor business practice. Philip Sheppard

6 9

RE: [bc-gnso] Nominations for BC elections
by Ron Andruff Jan. 18, 2010

Jan. 18, 2010

Thanks for this information, Gary. I have to say I am surprised by it because we have a good number of members from Europe, in particular, that are quite active participants in the BC. Perhaps other members might join me in coercing Liz Williams to consider running for VP Policy, considering her strong background in that area... as well as encouraging others off list to throw their hats into the ring where their strengths lay. We only, effectively, have three days to enroll non-NA candidates, so I encourage all of the membership to engage in this important process so that we can elect a geo-diverse, representative body with the right skill sets. Sincerely, RA Ronald N. Andruff RNA Partners, Inc. 220 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor New York, New York 10001 www.rnapartners.com V: +1 212 481 2820 x 11 F: +1 212 481 2859 -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of "BC Secretariat" Sent: 2010-01-18 13:32 To: bc-gnso(a)icann.org Subject: [bc-gnso] Nominations for BC elections Dear Members The nomination period for the BC Executive Committee elections closed at midnight yesterday. I have received two nominations for the position of Chair and one nomination each for the positions of Vice Chair Policy, Vice Chair Finance and a Representative to the Commercial Stakeholders Group. Every nominee is from the North America region so I must respond to this according to the BC Charter 5.1: "If at the close of nominations, it would result in all Executive Committee except Council representatives, or all Council representatives, being from the same region, the nomination period may be extended to improve geographic diversity." It is important that the BC makes an effort to recognise and support geographic diversity and I am therefore extending the nomination period to midnight on Thursday 21 January in order to invite nominations from regions other than North America. For clarity, all positions remain open for nomination. I will contact members again on Friday once the extended nomination period has closed. Gary

1 0

Nominations for BC elections
by "BC Secretariat" Jan. 18, 2010

Jan. 18, 2010

Dear Members The nomination period for the BC Executive Committee elections closed at midnight yesterday. I have received two nominations for the position of Chair and one nomination each for the positions of Vice Chair Policy, Vice Chair Finance and a Representative to the Commercial Stakeholders Group. Every nominee is from the North America region so I must respond to this according to the BC Charter 5.1: "If at the close of nominations, it would result in all Executive Committee except Council representatives, or all Council representatives, being from the same region, the nomination period may be extended to improve geographic diversity." It is important that the BC makes an effort to recognise and support geographic diversity and I am therefore extending the nomination period to midnight on Thursday 21 January in order to invite nominations from regions other than North America. For clarity, all positions remain open for nomination. I will contact members again on Friday once the extended nomination period has closed. Gary

1 0

Nominating period
by BC Secretariat Jan. 15, 2010

Jan. 15, 2010

Dear Members As this is the last working day of the week, I would like to remind you that the nomination period for the BC Executive Committee elections closes at midnight on Sunday 17 January. I will be in touch again on Monday to announce the nominees and post election statements. Best wishes Gary

1 0

Public Comment: STI Report on Trademark Protection in New gTLDs
by Philip Sheppard Jan. 15, 2010

Jan. 15, 2010

FYI - an announce mail http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-17dec09-en.htm Public Comment: STI Report on Trademark Protection in New gTLDs 17 December 2009 The Special Trademarks Issues Working Team (STI) has published its Report on its recommendations to create a Trademark Clearinghouse and Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure to protect trademarks in the New GTLD Program. The public comment period ends on 26 January 2010. http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201001.htm#sti Special Trademark Issues Review Team Recommendations [PDF, 272K] http://gnso.icann.org/issues/sti/sti-wt-recommendations-11dec09-en.pdf You can also find this report at http://gnso.icann.org/issues/. Background On 12 October 2009, the ICANN Board sent a letter [PDF, 736K] to the GNSO requesting its review of the policy implications of certain trademark protection mechanisms proposed for the New gTLD Program, as described in the Draft Applicant Guidebook (http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-rfp-clean-04oct09-en.pdf [PDF, 198K]) and accompanying memoranda. Specifically, the Board Letter requested that the GNSO provide input on whether it approves the proposed staff model , or, in the alternative, the GNSO could propose an alternative that is equivalent or more effective and implementable. In response, t he GNSO adopted a resolution creating the Special Trademarks Issues review team (STI) on 28 October 2009, which included representatives from each Stakeholder Group ; At-Large; Nominating Committee Appointees; and the Government Advisory Committee, to analyze the specific rights protection mechanisms that have been proposed for inclusion in the Draft Applicant Guidebook. The STI delivered to the GNSO Council its Report [PDF, 272K], which describes an alternative model that the STI believes is more effective and implementable than the model proposed in the Draft Applicant Guidebook version 3. The GNSO Council unanimously approved the recommendations contained in the STI Report for public comment and consideration by ICANN when it finalizes the proposed model for trademark protection in the New gTLD Program. For additional information on the new gTLD Program: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/related-en.htm.

1 0

NetChoice files comment on ICANN's Public Interest Test
by Steve DelBianco Jan. 13, 2010

Jan. 13, 2010

To BC members: NetChoice filed comments today with ICANN, regarding the new public interest test for reviewing ICANN decisions. This is for the Accountability review of ICANN, as required by the new Affirmation of Commitments. The NetChoice comment is below. All comments are listed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/affrev-draft-processes/index.html#00000 We're recommending that the 'public interest' test encompass two tests that are meaningful to BC members: Availability and Integrity. If you agree, please consider filing a supporting comment, at http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201001.htm#affrev --Steve Comment on discussion draft for Affirmation Reviews By Steve DelBianco, executive director of NetChoice 13-Jan-2010 *ICANN's new Public Interest Imperative* The Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) adds a new imperative: ICANN decisions must now meet a 'public interest' test. Public interest is part of AoC commitments 3 and 4, and is an explicit criteria in the Accountability Review. Accordingly, ICANN staff featured 'public interest' in the draft terms of reference for the Accountability review. But neither the Affirmation nor the discussion draft has proposed what 'public interest' means for ICANN. Should we just let review panelists (and their consultants) set their own definitions of 'public interest'? I hope not. The broader ICANN community should define the public interest test for ICANN decisions. *Recommended definition of 'Public Interest' for ICANN* First, I believe that the 'public' part of public interest is concerned more with users and registrants than with contracted parties and others who are deeply involved at ICANN. Commitment 4 of the AoC makes this point in calling upon ICANN to analyze and publish the 'effects of its decisions on the public'. Second, I believe that the public interest in ICANN decisions is somewhat broader than just a secure and stable DNS. Namely, users and registrants want ICANN to make sure the DNS delivers two essential and measurable qualities: *Availability* and *Integrity* Availability of the DNS is critical for global users who increasingly rely on the Internet for information, communications, and commerce. Domain name resolutions need to be available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, from anywhere on the globe. Availability also means being able to use any language and any script for both generic and country-code domains and email addresses. Availability can also apply to domain names sought by registrants: will domains in new gTLDs be available to the public, or will they be captured by insiders? That kind of availability should also be part of the public interest test for ICANN decisions. Integrity of the DNS is vital to businesses and end-users of the Internet. Businesses rely upon the integrity of domain name registration to ensure that their brands are not misrepresented or misappropriated. E-commerce and Internet financial transactions absolutely require integrity in resolution of domain names and secure delivery of encrypted data. Internet users depend upon the integrity of domain name services to provide accurate and authentic results when they look up a website or send an email. Integrity is undermined by deceptive practices such as redirecting users to fraudulent websites or providing false information about the true owner of a web domain. It's true that ICANN decisions alone cannot directly address much of what undermines DNS integrity today. But ICANN can promote integrity by making policy and enforcing rules that require contract parties to meet industry security standards. For these reasons, I believe that Availability and Integrity are necessary elements in the public interest test that will be applied to ICANN decisions in the upcoming Accountability Review. I encourage further community discussion on the concept of public interest in Affirmation reviews. This term is too important to leave undefined or let a few reviewers define it to fit their own agenda. If we allow 'public interest' to mean anything and everything, it will end up meaning nothing at all. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

1 0

FW: Standing for BC chair - statement of interest from Marilyn Cade
by Marilyn Cade Jan. 11, 2010

Jan. 11, 2010

Dear BC Colleagues As we enter 2010, I wanted to communicate with BC members to declare my interest in standing for election for the chair of the BC. I would appreciate your consideration but ask that all communications regarding this topic be sent, for now, until the nomination process opens, " off list" to marilynscade(a)hotmail.com, so that we don't overburden the list with campaigning. My intent in posting this announcement is merely to let you know of my interest and to ask that you consider my interest, once the nomination process opens. ==========================================================================Background: I am expecting that we will hear soon that elections will open in early January, and so it seems timely to let you know of my interest, and why I am interested in being chair of the BC. I am not trying to create an online campaign, so ask that you merely note my interest, and that you send any direct communications regarding my interest, or any questions off list to my email at marilynscade(a)hotmail.com We have benefitted from hard work and dedication of our councilors and officers, and of our secretariat, Gary Hills, but as we all know, with the BC's new charter, there is a new approach to governance/leadership of the BC in 2010, providing for separate administrative/management officers, with four new officers who are standing for election early in 2010, to then join the existing policy councilors - Mike Rodenbaugh and Zahid Jamil, who together will form the new Executive Committee for the Business and Commercial Users Constituency (BC). The BC chair role is essentially a coordinating role, with specific expertise in other activites -- policy coordination and finance/operations -- given over to other elected officers, and a new specifically designated role for a CSG representative. Position interested in: I am interested in being elected as chair of the BC. During 2010, there is important work to be done by the chair of the BC. This will be a vitally important year for the new structure of the BC, and a very important time to work out, as well, how to expand and broaden membership of the BC, as well as how the BC works with other constituencies on key topics of priority interests to its members. We will also be working with other members of the Commercial Users Group (CSG) during this year; there will be a designated elected position to provide that interaction with other CSG reps from the IPC and ISPCP. The BC members will have much to consider during this year, both organizationally and structurally, as well as their ongoing focus on policy issues, which will rest in the new Policy V.Chair and the two policy councilors. I know that BC companies, and other potential BC members often have broad interests as well in such topics as the strategic plan, Internet security and stability, and topics such as Board improvement. The chair can help to identify and support the BC's appropriate attention to those broader issues and perspectives that will make the BC a highly respected voice in the macro issues that affect ICANN, while supporting the work of other elected officers/and members, by helping to ensure that there are resources and attention focused on the key policy activities of the BC. If elected chair, I would expect to work collaboratively with the other members of the Executive Committee; to advance as much transparency as possible on decision making and planning, and to undertake a focus on business outreach for strengthening the membership and participation of the BC within ICANN. Once there is an official election process, I am interested in being nominated and standing for election to the BC chair. But I would welcome your feedback in the meantime and any questions that you may have, which should be sent to my email off list at marilynscade(a)hotmail.com. I don't think that we should turn the BC list into a debate about candidates, but do believe that announcing interest is an appropriate use of the BC list. As a short version of my statement of conflicts/interests, I do not represent any companies who are registries or registries or who are registry applicants, and in fact, do not represent any companies within the BC or within ICANN. My company -- mCADE LLC/ICT Strategies -- provides advisory services focused on Internet governance activities, Internet security and stability, and advising commercial enterprises on the activities of intergovernmental and international organizations that are of relevance to businesses. Marilyn Cade + 1 202 360 1196 or + 1 202 251 6787 email: marilynscade(a)hotmail.com

3 2