Dear Members, As previously mentioned the Council agenda has not yet been released, but please find below the motions for the call. Once the agenda is released I will forward it to BC Members for your convenience. Thank you, -- Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat@icann.org https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+07+June+2012 Motions 07 June 2012 * * Ajouté parde saint gery <https://community.icann.org/display/%7Eglen>, modifié parde saint gery <https://community.icann.org/display/%7Eglen>le mai 31, 2012 (afficher les modifications <https://community.icann.org/pages/diffpages.action?pageId=30345100&originalId=34603391>)Translate <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+07+June+2012...> * 1. Motion to create a drafting team to develop the charters for two Working Groups on the Creation of non-binding Best Practices to help Registrars and Registries address the Abusive Registrations of Domain Names *Made by: Zahid Jamil* *Seconded by: Carlos Aguirre* *Deferred from the 10 May 2012 GNSO Council meeting to the next Council meeting on 7 June 2012, by Yoav Keren on request of the Registrar Stakeholder Group for the reason that the Registrar**Stakeholder Group needed more time to discuss the motion.* Whereas, following the recommendation of the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group, the GNSO Council requested a discussion paper on the creation of non-binding best practices to help registrars and registries address the abusive registrations of domain names in accordance with the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report; Whereas, ICANN Staff submitted the discussion paper to the GNSO Council on 28 September 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/discussion-paper-rap-best-practices-28sep11...); Whereas the GNSO Council discussed the discussion paper at its working session at the ICANN meeting in Dakar and a public workshop was organized; Whereas the GNSO Council identified the issue as a priority topic at its wrap up session at the ICANN meeting in Dakar; Whereas, the discussion paper recommended the creation of two Working Groups, namely one GNSO Working Group to establish the framework for best practices and one Cross-Community Technical Group to propose candidate best practices to address the abusive registration of domain names. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: Resolved, that the GNSO Council hereby approves the formation of a GNSO drafting team which will be responsible for developing the Charters for the two Working Groups to address the creation of non-binding best practices to help registrars and registries address the Abusive Registrations of Domain Names as identified above; Resolved, the drafting team will consider the discussion paper prepared by ICANN Staff well as the discussions of the GNSO Council on the discussion paper and the public workshops on this topic as part of its deliberations and development of the Charters; Resolved further, that [Name] shall serve as the GNSO Council Liaison for this drafting team. 2*Motion to Address Whois Access as Recommended by the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Made by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben* *Seconded by: John Berard * Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group submitted its report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf); Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and formed an Implementation Drafting Team to draft a proposed approach with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report; Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team submitted its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010 (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf); Whereas on 3 February 2011 (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102) the GNSO Council requested feedback from ICANN Compliance in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and a response was received on 23 February 2011 (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html). In addition, a discussion with Compliance Staff was held at the ICANN meeting in San Francisco. Whereas the GNSO Council thanked the ICANN Compliance Department for its feedback in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and determined that no further work on this recommendation was needed. The GNSO Council welcomed the commitment of the ICANN Compliance Department 'to report on compliance activities and publish data about WHOIS accessibility, on at least an annual basis' (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html). Whereas in response to WHOIS Access recommendation #1, the GNSO Council asked the WHOIS Survey Working Group to consider including the issue of WHOIS Access as part of the survey it has been tasked to develop, and the Working Group informed the GNSO Council on 11 January that 'the issue does not fall within the remit of its current charter and recommends that the item not be included in their upcoming survey'. Whereas the GNSO Council recognizes that the issue of WHOIS access is also covered in the Final Issue Report on the RAA (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/fInal-issue-report-raa-06mar12-en.pdf). THEREFORE BE IT, Resolved, the GNSO Council recommends that the issue of WHOIS access (to ensure that WHOIS data is accessible in an appropriately reliable, enforceable, and consistent fashion) is included in the RAA Policy Development Process when it commences. Resolved, the GNSO Council will review by end of September, 2012, whether the RAA PDP has commenced and included this issue or whether alternative approaches should be pursued.