Channel 1. BC participation in ICANN Public Comment process:
Chris Chaplow submitted BC comments on 17-Jun
Channel 2. Support for discussion and votes of our representatives on GNSO Council
Agenda for Sun 19-Jun GNSO Council work session includes:
10:30 - 13:00 New gTLD Session: Proposed Applicant Guidebook and IDN Variant Update (Kurt Pritz)13:00 - 14:00 Working Lunch: Preparation for meeting with ccNSO14:00 - 14:45 Inter-Registrar Transfer Policies part B (IRTP B) PDP Presentation of Final Report14:45 - 15:30 Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP WT) Presentation of Final Report
Council motions are at https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+22+June+2011
Note: in our comments on RAP report, the BC supported recommendation to initiate a PDP by requesting an Issues Report:
Cybersquatting (R1) – The RAPWG recommends the initiation of a Policy Development Process by requesting an Issues Report to investigate the current state of the UDRP, and consider revisions to address cybersquatting if appropriate. This effort should consider:
How the UDRP has addressed the problem of cybersquatting to date, and any insufficiencies/inequalities associated with the process.
Whether the definition of cybersquatting inherent within the existing UDRP language needs to be reviewed or updated.
Wednesday Workshop on this topic
Note: BC draft proposed definitions in the context of the DNS and new gTLDs: (from attached doc):
Competition is the availability of multiple suitable TLDs and multiple Registrars where registrants may seek their desired domain name at reasonable prices and terms.
Consumer Trust is the perceived integrity of domain name registrations such that Internet users have confidence that a domain name is held to the advertised purpose and standards of the TLD operator, ICANN and relevant law.
Consumer Choice is the availability of TLDs that offer competing propositions as to the purpose and integrity of their domain name registrants.
Mikey O'Connor to present
Joint ccNSO-GNSO IDN working group
Joint Applicant Support (JAS) SO/AC WG on New gTLD Applicant Support (JAS)
Channel 3. Supporting discussion and voting on policy matters before the Commercial Stakeholders Group (CSG)
Suggesting topics for Public Forum
Sarah Deutsch (alt Marilyn Cade)
Channel 4. BC statements and responses during public meetings (outreach events, public forum, etc.)
Affirmation review team for Whois (Susan Kawaguchi, Bill Smith)
Final Guidebook at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-7-en.htm
BC Comments on April-2011Guidebook. http://www.bizconst.org/Positions-Statements/BC+on+Final+App+Guidebook+May+2011+v3.pdf
Summary of BC comments in SFO on GAC Scorecard http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg01890.html
ICANN published new Guidebook on 15-Apr. http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-6-en.htm
ICANN revised response to the GAC Scorecard http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/board-notes-gac-scorecard-clean-15apr11-en.pdf
GAC on RPMs http://gac.icann.org/press-release/further-gac-advice-new-gtld-rights-protection-mechanisms
Rights Protection Mechanisms (GAC page 5):1. GAC wants TM Claims and Sunrise services to go beyond exact matches. Clearinghouse RFP should solicit proposals on expanded matching, too.
2. TM Claims service should run indefinitely
3. "Use" should not be a requirement to get into the TM Clearinghouse database
4. Standard of proof for URS / PDDRP should be lowered to "preponderance of evidence"
5. "Loser pays" should apply at the threshold level of 15 domain names.
Review and adjust RPMs 1 year after 75th new gTLD is launched (GAC page 6):
GAC proposes a formal review of items 1, 2, and 3 (above) one year after the 75th new gTLD is launched. (similar to the BC request for a reduced batch size to assess and adjust the process)
Compliance (GAC page 9):
"GAC welcomes ICANN’s intention to enhance its Contract Compliance efforts and urges the Board to ensure that this effort coincides with the implementation of the new gTLD program."
Applicant background screening (GAC page 9):
GAC says screening process should look for violations of consumer protection / deceptive commercial practices.