Dear All,
Per action item #4 – please find here the google doc where you can add possible questions for external experts:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/152k_W8Wkp7XecejOutuYbCwAITwgfU3uHyzZEVgznjA/edit?usp=sharing. Should you have difficulty using Google Doc, please feel free to send your proposed question to the list and staff will add it for you. You are requested to
provide the question, identify to which topic/charter question it is related and indicate whether the question is intended for all external experts or only those with specific expertise.
Also as a reminder, please share your feedback on the proposed objectives and not objectives categories as outlined in the attached documents prior to Thursday’s meeting and participate in the survey on charter
questions #4 and #7 (see links which were sent to the mailing list last week).
Best regards,
Marika
From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>
Date: Friday, June 30, 2017 at 19:39
To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
Subject: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from 27 June CCWG-AP meeting
Dear All,
For those of you that were not able to attend the new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting, please review the transcript and/or recording of the meeting which can be found here:
https://schedule.icann.org/event/B3pK/gnso-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-cross-community-working-group-f2f-meeting[schedule.icann.org].
Please remember to provide your input on the high level overview of the survey results (see attached) prior to the next meeting, which has been scheduled for 13 July. Based on your feedback as well as the
feedback provided during the meeting, staff will update the overview accordingly.
Best regards,
Marika
CCWG AP Meeting on Tuesday 27 June 2017 – Notes
These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided
separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw[community.icann.org].
Audit Requirements
Responses to Charter Question #2
- CCWG to review whether this adequately captures the comments received (see
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-NTHS95MP/[surveymonkey.com])
- Consider stress testing the mission limitation – words of the mission may be more limiting. Need to talk through sample submissions of whether they would
violate the mission.
- Buckets identified are not expected to be exclusionary.
- There has to be conscious effort to determine whether things are within or outside of ICANN’s mission. Not only for staff to make that judgement – is also
for the community. Ultimate decision will be for the ICANN Board though.
- Examples have been identified as part of the responses – could be reviewed in a next step. Would give a flavor, not expected to be exhaustive.
- How to deal with buckets that may conflict with each other? Potential segregation of multiple uses could be considered. CCWG will need to consider this further
– this is just a first conversation.
- Types of applicants – what would be the process for validating applicants? This will be addressed in a later phase. Certain risks will be taken on some of
these things – size of grant will depend on the risk willing to be taken. Without risk there will not be any innovative work be undertaken.
- Input and ideas from community will be needed on what falls within ICANN’s mission and what doesn’t as there will be obviously grey areas. Also factor in
that determination of what belongs in ICANN’s mission and what doesn’t in the context of this effort could also determine in which area ICANN undertakes activities in the future. Look at the question iteratively and progressively to ensure that broader implications
are understood. Input from the ICANN community is essential to that decision, but it is up to the Board to confirm that mission is being maintained
- Original reference in AGB
“The purpose of an auction is to resolve contention in a clear, objective manner. It is planned that costs of the new gTLD program will offset by fees, so any funds coming from a last resort contention resolution mechanism such as auctions would result (after
paying for the auction process) in additional funding. Any proceeds from auctions will be reserved and earmarked until the uses of funds are determined. Funds must be used in a manner that supports directly ICANN’s Mission and Core Values and also allows ICANN
to maintain its not for profit status.Possible uses of auction funds include formation of a foundation with a clear mission and a transparent way to allocate funds to projects that are of interest to the greater Internet community, such as grants to support
new gTLD applications or registry operators from communities in subsequent gTLD rounds, the creation of an ICANN-administered/community-based fund for specific projects for the benefit of the Internet community, the creation of a registry continuity fund for
the protection of registrants (ensuring that funds would be in place to support the operation of a gTLD registry until a successor could be found), or establishment of a security fund to expand use of secure protocols, conduct research, and support standards
development organizations in accordance with ICANN's security and stability mission”.
- Examples included in AGB reference could be stress tested as it predates the current wording of ICANN’s mission. Consider adding mission statement to the
documents so that it becomes easier to evaluate.
- Consider rewording the first buckets of what shouldn’t be objectives so it is more aligned with what was in the AGB.
Action item #1: CCWG members to review survey summary (see attached) and provide input on buckets identified and whether any information is missing or mischaracterized.
Input to be provided prior to the next meeting (scheduled for 13 July).
Action item #2: Share additional comments received for WG review (see attached).
- In order to obtain input in relation to charter questions #4 and #7 – launch straw person type of survey. Draw from the initial input received during the
phase 1. Share preview of the survey before launching it. Launch prior to next meeting.
Action item #3: staff to launch survey on question #4 and #7, with preliminary responses based on initial input received as well as opportunity for open ended responses.
Questions for external experts
Action item #4: staff to create google doc to allow for CCWG members and participants to identify questions that should be asked from external experts.
Marika Konings
Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email:
marika.konings@icann.org
Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive
courses[learn.icann.org] and visiting the GNSO
Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org].