December 2004 - council - lists.icann.org

CRISP open call 12 January 2005
by GNSO SECRETARIAT Dec. 23, 2004

Dec. 23, 2004

[To: Council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: dow1-2tf[at]gnso.icann.org; dow3tf[at]gnso.icann.org] At the request of the combined Whois Task Force 1 & 2 participants, a briefing has been arranged by the Cross Registry Information Service Protocol (CRISP) Working Group of the IETF. All interested parties are invited to join the call. This open teleconference will take place on Wednesday, January 12, 2005 at 11:00 EST, (6:00 Honolulu, 8:00 LA, 13:00 Buenos Aires, 16:00 UTC, 17:00 CET) Call details will be sent out at a later date. If you are interested, please let me know as this will facilitate booking adequate lines. Thank you. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org

1 0

ICANN Strategic plan & GNSO review - public comment period open
by GNSO SECRETARIAT Dec. 23, 2004

Dec. 23, 2004

[To : Council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org;announce[at]gnso.icann.org] Please note two recent announcements calling for public comments: http://gnso.icann.org/ http://www.icann.org/ Independent GNSO Council Review Posted (22 December 2004) In fulfillment of the GNSO Council Terms of Reference, and ICANN Board Resolution 04.91, the independent review of the GNSO Council has been completed and is now available for public comment. The public comment period will conclude on 24 January 2005. http://www.icann.org/ ICANN Extends Public Comment Period for ICANN Strategic Plan (22 December 2004) As resolved during the recent ICANN Annual Meeting in Cape Town, South Africa, ICANN is extending the public comment period on its Strategic Plan to 28 February, 2005. ICANN encourages all members of the community to participate in this public comment forum. Thank you Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org

1 0

Call for Constituency statements on Whois tf 1/2 recommendations
by GNSO SECRETARIAT Dec. 22, 2004

Dec. 22, 2004

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] DOW1-2tf[at]gnso.icann.org] Constituency statements should be submitted on or before MONDAY, JANUARY 31, 2005 Call for the submission of constituency statements on the Whois task force 1/2 Recommendations relating to improving notification and consent for the use of contact data in the Whois system. http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/whois-notification-30nov04.pdf 1. Registrars must ensure that disclosures regarding availability and third-party access to personal data associated with domain names actually be presented to registrants during the registration process. Linking to an external web page is not sufficient. 2. Registrars must ensure that these disclosures are set aside from other provisions of the registration agreement if they are presented to registrants together with that agreement. Alternatively, registrars may present data access disclosures separate from the registration agreement. The wording of the notice provided by registrars should, to the extent feasible, be uniform. 3. Registrars must obtain a separate acknowledgement from registrars that they have read and understand these disclosures. This provision does not affect registrars' existing obligations to obtain registrant consent to the use of their contact information in the WHOIS system. The constituency statements should ideally be consistent with the ICANN bylaws - GNSO Policy-Development Process. http://www.icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/bylaws-19apr04.htm#AnnexA Section 7, d. Collection of Information. 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following: (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue; (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members; (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views; (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and (v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy. GNSO Secretariat -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org

1 0

Resignation of the Chair of WHOIS TF3
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 22, 2004

Dec. 22, 2004

Hello All, Unfortunately Brian Darville has had to resign from chairing WHOIS TF3 due to other commitments. I thank Brian for his efforts in chairing the TF3 and working to identify a consensus position. It seemed that there was some progress in discussions involving the whole Council in Cape Town. If the Council agrees, I am prepared to chair a couple of extra meetings in January 2005 to get some agreement around some high-level recommendations (similar to those developed so far by WHOIS TF1/2), and then leave the Task Force to elect a new chair and flesh out the detail of recommendations in a report suitable for public comment and eventually formal approval as a consensus recommendation. Regards, Bruce Tonkin -----Original Message----- From: Brian Darville Sent: Wednesday, 22 December 2004 1:59 AM To: Bruce Tonkin Subject: Task Force 3 - Resignation as Chair and From the Task Force Dear Bruce: I am writing to formally notify you that I am resigning from participation in Task Force 3, including my role as Chair of the Task Force. Due to other professional commitments I have undertaken recently, I cannot continue to participate in the Task Force. I had originally planned that my participation in the Task Force would end in October 2004. I stayed on through December in an effort to reach consensus on the narrow recommendations the Task Force had been considering this fall. However, we were unable to reach a consensus. At this point, I believe it will be fruitful for the IPC to appoint another Task Force representative who can more fully participate in the Task Force, including traveling to the various ICANN meetings. I appreciate your assisting the Task Force this Fall, and wish you and the other Task Force members a swift resolution of the Task Force's remaining work. Sincerely, Brian Darville Oblon, Spivak

5 4

RE: [council] Resignation of the Chair of WHOIS TF3
by Niklas_Lagergren＠mpaa.org Dec. 22, 2004

Dec. 22, 2004

Ditto. Thanks for stepping in Bruce. Nik > -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be] > Sent: mercredi 22 décembre 2004 9:01 > To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; council(a)gnso.icann.org > Subject: RE: [council] Resignation of the Chair of WHOIS TF3 > > > You have my support > > Philip > >

1 0

Update on staff recruitment
by Paul Verhoef Dec. 22, 2004

Dec. 22, 2004

All, The progress on recruitment of staff remains fully in line with the last update I gave you. We have interviewed short-listed candidates and identified two preferred candidates for the Senior Office Policy Coordination and the GNSO Policy Officer respectively. At this moment, we are carrying out background checks before making formal offers. I hope to be able to make an announcement on the new staff in the first weeks of January. You may be interested to know that we had some 250 candidates for a total of 3 position advertised for my group, and that the two selected candidates are really excellent with much relevant experience and, assuming that we are able to make successful offers, I am looking very much forward to their arrival. Rests me to wish you and your families a merry Xmas and a very happy New Year (at least for those who celebrate these events), and I am looking forward to work with you in the new year. Best Paul ____________________________________ Paul Verhoef Vice President Policy Development Support ICANN 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 Fax: +32.2.234 7848 www.icann.org

1 0

RE: [council] WIPO-II
by Lucy.Nichols＠nokia.com Dec. 6, 2004

Dec. 6, 2004

and just to clarify my comments, I'm all for new TLDs. However, new space is not the solution to the problems raised by WIPO-II. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 6:22 AM To: marc(a)schneiders.org; alick.wilson(a)xendra.co.nz Cc: paul.verhoef(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org; jeffrey(a)icann.org Subject: RE: [council] WIPO-II I think Marc's point highlights the real issue here ...the need for a mechanism to protect IGO and country names (where appropriate) in every existing (and future) TLD ...not to create new space. Lucy -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Marc Schneiders Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:56 AM To: Alick Wilson Cc: 'Paul Verhoef'; council(a)gnso.icann.org; 'John Jeffrey' Subject: RE: [council] WIPO-II Your line of thinking I do like. But in my view new sTLDs are not needed. For IGOs there is already .int (as in wipo.int) And countries have their ccTLDs. I do like the idea, that having your own space (TLD), means your are not entitled to the rest of the name space. Marc On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, at 16:48 [=GMT+1300], Alick Wilson wrote: > Colleagues, I wonder if there is a case to be made for new sTLDs for > international intergovernmental organizations (say .igo) and countries (say > .country)? > > While these would not deal directly with offending sites in the rest of the > gTLD namespace, it would at least provide a single official address for IGOs > and countries. > > The concept could, of course, be extended to other sensitive types of name. > > Am I right off track or does this have some merit? > > Alick > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On > Behalf Of Paul Verhoef > Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2004 10:41 p.m. > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > Cc: 'John Jeffrey' > Subject: [council] WIPO-II > > > > All, > > Please find enclosed the letter and its annex from WIPO that we received > last week. > > I understand there were some technical issues with getting it on the > web-site but as soon as these are arranged it will go up, hopefully already > today. I would like to offer my excuses for that. > > regards > > Paul > > > <<...>> <<...>> > > ____________________________________ > Paul Verhoef > Vice President Policy Development Support > ICANN > 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 > B-1040 Brussels, Belgium > Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 > Fax: +32.2.234 7848 > <http://www.icann.org> www.icann.org > > >

2 1

RE: [council] WIPO-II
by Lucy.Nichols＠nokia.com Dec. 6, 2004

Dec. 6, 2004

I think Marc's point highlights the real issue here ...the need for a mechanism to protect IGO and country names (where appropriate) in every existing (and future) TLD ...not to create new space. Lucy -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of ext Marc Schneiders Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:56 AM To: Alick Wilson Cc: 'Paul Verhoef'; council(a)gnso.icann.org; 'John Jeffrey' Subject: RE: [council] WIPO-II Your line of thinking I do like. But in my view new sTLDs are not needed. For IGOs there is already .int (as in wipo.int) And countries have their ccTLDs. I do like the idea, that having your own space (TLD), means your are not entitled to the rest of the name space. Marc On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, at 16:48 [=GMT+1300], Alick Wilson wrote: > Colleagues, I wonder if there is a case to be made for new sTLDs for > international intergovernmental organizations (say .igo) and countries (say > .country)? > > While these would not deal directly with offending sites in the rest of the > gTLD namespace, it would at least provide a single official address for IGOs > and countries. > > The concept could, of course, be extended to other sensitive types of name. > > Am I right off track or does this have some merit? > > Alick > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On > Behalf Of Paul Verhoef > Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2004 10:41 p.m. > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > Cc: 'John Jeffrey' > Subject: [council] WIPO-II > > > > All, > > Please find enclosed the letter and its annex from WIPO that we received > last week. > > I understand there were some technical issues with getting it on the > web-site but as soon as these are arranged it will go up, hopefully already > today. I would like to offer my excuses for that. > > regards > > Paul > > > <<...>> <<...>> > > ____________________________________ > Paul Verhoef > Vice President Policy Development Support > ICANN > 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 > B-1040 Brussels, Belgium > Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 > Fax: +32.2.234 7848 > <http://www.icann.org> www.icann.org > > >

1 0

RE: [council] WIPO-II
by Grant Forsyth Dec. 6, 2004

Dec. 6, 2004

Another wonderful consequence of governments, IGOs, operating their own sTLD would be that they can then "work between themselves" on how to resolve the obvious ambiguities of the likes of "Paris", France and "Paris", Texas - let alone the reduction of names to acronyms! Grant Forsyth Manager Industry & Regulatory Affairs TelstraClear Cnr Taharoto & Northcote Roads Private Bag 92143 AUCKLAND ph +64 9 912 5759 fx + 64 9 912 4077 Mb 029 912 5759 -----Original Message----- From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, 03 December, 2004 21:01 To: alick.wilson(a)xendra.co.nz; paul.verhoef(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: jeffrey(a)icann.org; Grant.Forsyth(a)team.telstraclear.co.nz; grant.forsyth(a)clear.co.nz Subject: RE: [council] WIPO-II Certainly it could be interesting to consider a new sponsored TLD space for IGOs, but I am thinking that .int is that space, isn't it? I also think from my conversations with some of those who have positions regarding this issue that they are viewing the igo name as what I might view the trademark of a famous and well known brand of a multi national company. That is, they are asking for their "name" in any gTLD. I am not sure that a new sponsored TLD would be be responsive to their The situation today is that a famous and well known brand holder registers, or defends their brand, in the TLDs where they veiw it important and relevant to do so. The value of sponsored TLDs is that since it is a "defined" space, it is not allowed for those who do not fit the "sponsorship criteria" to register. Thus, if a space is focused on international organizations, with some definition of that, only international organizations who meet that criteria. can register. I am under the impression that only international organizations with certain standing can register in the int. That sounds like a "sponsored" TLD, functionally, at least. >From: Alick Wilson <alick.wilson(a)xendra.co.nz> >Reply-To: alick.wilson(a)xendra.co.nz >To: "'Paul Verhoef'" <paul.verhoef(a)icann.org>, council(a)gnso.icann.org >CC: "'John Jeffrey'" <jeffrey(a)icann.org> >Subject: RE: [council] WIPO-II >Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:48:00 +1300 > >Colleagues, I wonder if there is a case to be made for new sTLDs for >international intergovernmental organizations (say .igo) and countries (say >.country)? > >While these would not deal directly with offending sites in the rest of the >gTLD namespace, it would at least provide a single official address for IGOs >and countries. > >The concept could, of course, be extended to other sensitive types of name. > >Am I right off track or does this have some merit? > >Alick > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On >Behalf Of Paul Verhoef >Sent: Tuesday, 23 November 2004 10:41 p.m. >To: council(a)gnso.icann.org >Cc: 'John Jeffrey' >Subject: [council] WIPO-II > > > >All, > >Please find enclosed the letter and its annex from WIPO that we received >last week. > >I understand there were some technical issues with getting it on the >web-site but as soon as these are arranged it will go up, hopefully already >today. I would like to offer my excuses for that. > >regards > >Paul > > ><<...>> <<...>> > >____________________________________ >Paul Verhoef >Vice President Policy Development Support >ICANN >6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 >B-1040 Brussels, Belgium >Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 >Fax: +32.2.234 7848 > <http://www.icann.org> www.icann.org > >

1 0

GNSO Forum and Council real time captioning 3 December 2004
by gnso.icann Dec. 4, 2004

Dec. 4, 2004

[To : Council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: dow1-2tf[at]gnso.icann.org; dow3tf[at]gnso.icann.org] Please see the real time captioning of the GNSO public forum held in Cape Town on December 3, 2004 at: http://www.icann.org/meetings/capetown/captioning-gnso-forum-03dec04.htm and the real time captioning of the GNSO Council meeting held in Cape Town on December 3, 2004 at: http://www.icann.org/meetings/capetown/captioning-gnso-council-03dec04.h tm Thank you. Kind regards Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council Representatives from the Registries constituency
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

-----Original Message----- From: Marie.Zitkova(a)sita.aero [mailto:Marie.Zitkova@sita.aero] Sent: Friday, 3 December 2004 9:14 AM To: Bruce Tonkin Cc: Glen Saint Gery Subject: GNSO Council Representatives Bruce I am pleased to report that the gTLD Registries constituency elected the following representatives to the GNSO Council seats vacated after the 2004 annual meeting: Ken Stubbs Philip Colebrook (for the third seat allocated to gTLD Registries Constituency providing the constituency retains 3 representatives in the Council) Best regards, Marie Zitkova Chair, gTLD Registries Constituency

1 0

GNSO Council Weblog
by Ross Wm. Rader Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

In response to suggestions made at our meeting earlier this week, I have taken the initiative to create a weblog for use by the Council (donation, freebie, no-strings attached, etc.). As suggested, I'd like to move forward with an experiment with Glenn's cooperation to post the notes from our minutes to the weblog on a regular basis. I will be sitting down with Glenn sometime this week to discuss the finer points and provide her with some training - if there is interest, I'd be happy to include others in this walkthrough as well. More details to follow as we figure out next steps, etc. -- -rwr Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross Skydasher: A great way to start your day My weblog: http://www.byte.org

4 4

Robin Gross - New appointee from the Non-commercial constituency to the GNSO Council
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

-----Original Message----- From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Friday, 3 December 2004 9:18 AM To: gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org; jeffrey(a)icann.org; Bruce Tonkin Cc: ca(a)rits.org.br; marc(a)schneiders.org Subject: GNSO Council elections This is to inform you that Robin Gross has been elected to replace Jisuk Woo on the GNSO Council. --Milton Mueller, Chair NCUC

1 0

ANYONE WITH IM? (for alick)
by Amadeu Abril i Abril Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

folks for some reason my AIM-compatible chat software and Alick's refuse to talk. Is anyoen there taht could try to connect with him? Amadeu

1 1

Glen, do you or anybody else have an instant messenger up so Philip or I can send messages in lieu of phone? Thanks, Alick
by Alick Wilson Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

2 1

WIPO-II
by Paul Verhoef Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

All, Please find enclosed the letter and its annex from WIPO that we received last week. I understand there were some technical issues with getting it on the web-site but as soon as these are arranged it will go up, hopefully already today. I would like to offer my excuses for that. regards Paul ____________________________________ Paul Verhoef Vice President Policy Development Support ICANN 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32.2.234 7872 Fax: +32.2.234 7848 www.icann.org

5 4

Dial in problem
by Alick Wilson Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

Hi everyone, I'm also on line. Glen, proxy to Amadeu if I get lost. Alick

1 0

RE: We are on dial in but can't hear anybody or see Real Player, please advise
by Alick Wilson Dec. 3, 2004

Dec. 3, 2004

Hi everybody, Philip Colebrook and I are on dial in but aren't connected. Real Player is not working either. John Crain is on dial in line and trying to fix. Alick -----Original Message----- From: Steve Conte [mailto:conte@icann.org] Sent: Friday, 3 December 2004 9:48 p.m. To: alick.wilson(a)xendra.co.nz Cc: John Crain Subject: Re: We are on dial in but can't hear anybody or see Real Player, please advise Hi Alick, We're having some serious phone and connectivity issues in the auditorium. John Crain is in there (I'm doing the ccNSO meeting today) and hopefully things will stabilze. Steve At 12:40 AM 12/3/2004, you wrote: > --------------- Steve Conte - Technical Systems Administrator - ICANN conte(a)icann.org - www.icann.org +1 (310) 823 - 9358 x5829 PGP KeyID: E72D5F30

1 0

Proposed motion for Council meeting on Friday 3 Dec 2004
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 2, 2004

Dec. 2, 2004

Hello All, Here is a proposed motion for the Council meeting tomorrow. "Whereas at the ICANN meeting in Tunisia (October 2003) the Board resolved to change the transition article (Article XX) to allow three representatives per constituency on the GNSO Council until the end of the ICANN annual meeting 2004; and resolved to perform a review of the GNSO Council in or around July 2004 which should include among other aspects of the review criteria, an analysis of the efficacy of having three representatives from each constituency on the GNSO Council. Taking into account the draft of the external review report on the GNSO Council, and the Council's self-review, the GNSO Council requests that the ICANN Board extend the current arrangement of 3 representatives per constituency until the ICANN meeting in Mar del Plata, Argentina (April 2005). This will allow time for the external review to be completed following a public comment period, allow time for ICANN to announce a proposed change to the ICANN bylaws to allow three representatives per constituency on an ongoing basis, and allow an appropriate period for public discussion before changing the bylaws." Regards, Bruce

1 0

Updated self-review doc - version 2.2
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 2, 2004

Dec. 2, 2004

Hello All Attached is the latest version of the self-review document with the addition suggested by Niklas. Below is a plain text summary of the recommendations. Regards, Bruce Tonkin 10.1. Required changes to ICANN bylaws ======================================= 10.1.1. Maintain the present 3 representatives per constituency 10.1.2. Adjust the bylaws to specify that the timelines in the policy development process are guidelines, and allow the GNSO Council to set and revise timelines according to the level of consensus on a particular issue and the amount of volunteer and staff resources available for the specific issue. 10.2. Additional ICANN staff resources required =============================================== 10.2.1. Prior to the commencement of policy development on a particular issue, ensure that ICANN staff provide an analysis and Issues Paper that provides sufficient background and information to support the development of the Terms of Reference and statement of work for a Task Force. . The issue report should indicate how the issue is currently handled within the existing contractual and policy framework. In some instances, it may be necessary for Council to agree to commission an independent expert to analyse an issue (which may include interviewing affected parties within the GNSO) and propose options for policy recommendations that may address the issue. . 10.2.2. During the pubic comment process on a proposed policy recommendation, an independent expert may need to be commissioned to produce a report on the views of the GNSO community in relation to a proposed policy recommendation. 10.2.3. Provide staff support to the task forces and GNSO Council sub-committees that are skilled in creating reports that reflect the input provided by members of Council, and clearly identify where the areas of disagreement exist. 10.2.4. Provide staff support to the Task Forces and to the GNSO Council subcommittees that familiarize themselves with the bylaws and the policy development processes, as well as the relevant previous work of the Council. 10.2.5. Ensure that legal counsel is available for all GNSO Council calls, and ensure that legal counsel is available to task forces and subcommittees as required. With respect to policy development activity, ensure that the legal counsel is fully briefed on the existing contractual arrangements with registries and registrars that relate to the particular issue under discussion. 10.2.6. Prior to the development of a final policy recommendation for the GNSO Council, ICANN should ensure that the recommendation has been reviewed by legal counsel to ensure that the recommendation can be implemented and enforced via the relevant contracts. 10.2.7. Establish a project management process within ICANN that defines a plan and expected dates for implementation of a policy once it is approved by the ICANN Board. 10.2.8. Ensure that the mechanisms are established for monitoring and enforcing compliance with a new policy. This is particularly important in the first 6 months of a new policy, when registry and registrars systems are being modified to support a new policy. 10.2.9. ICANN staff develop a complaints handling process that is capable of logging complaints regarding gtld domain name registration practices, and capable of producing data on a trend basis. This data reporting would be useful on a monthly basis. 10.3. Actions required by the GNSO Council ========================================== 10.3.1. During the early public comment process, encourage members of the ICANN community to submit proposals for solutions to a particular issue. 10.3.2. Given that legal contracts between ICANN and registries and registrars may be open to different interpretation by the contracted parties. Ensure that legal advice from ICANN legal counsel (or external counsel to ICANN) is in writing, and allow affected parties (such as registrars and registries) to submit their own written legal advice for consideration by the GNSO community. 10.3.3. Ensure that the policy is ready for implementation after approval by the GNSO Council and ICANN Board. 10.3.4. As part of the Council report at the end of the policy development process, establish key metrics for measuring the success of the policy, and ensure that appropriate measurement and reporting systems are put in place. 10.3.5. To the extent that the lack of intermediate sanctions for non-compliance with contractual obligations presents a significant impediment to compliance activities, the GNSO should, without prejudice to efforts to enforce existing contractual obligations, develop recommendations for a system of graduated or intermediate sanctions for incorporation in revised contracts. As an initial step, ICANN legal counsel should brief GNSO Council (or a relevant subgroup/task force) on ICANN's current plans to correct ongoing harm and provide greater flexibility and legitimacy for the compliance function.

1 0

RE : [council] Updated draft v 2.1 of GNSO self review
by Niklas_Lagergren＠mpaa.org Dec. 1, 2004

Dec. 1, 2004

Bruce et al - I think the draft self-review report is a very good and useful document Now, following our discussion yesterday, I would like to draw your attention to recommendation 14 of the "Sharry" (external review document) which states that "The Council needs to work with ICANN operational staff to develop a compliance policy with graded penalties". Additionally, ICANN's draft strategic plan includes a sentence (p.32) on ICANN's current plans for "planned escalation of actions, including legal and specific performance remedies, to correct ongoing harm and provide greater flexibility and legitimacy for the compliance function." I would recommend that we add a recommendation of the same kind under point 5) of our self-review document. I suggest the following wording: To the extent that the lack of intermediate sanctions for non-compliance with contractual obligations presents a significant impediment to compliance activities, the GNSO should, without prejudice to efforts to enforce existing contractual obligations, develop recommendations for a system of graduated or intermediate sanctions for incorporation in revised contracts. As an initial step, ICANN legal counsel should brief GNSO Council (or a relevant subgroup/task force) on ICANN's current plans to correct ongoing harm and provide greater flexibility and legitimacy for the compliance function. Kind regards - Niklas -------- Message d'origine-------- De: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au] Date: sam. 11/27/2004 8:46 À: council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: Objet: [council] Updated draft v 2.1 of GNSO self review Hello All, Attached is a slightly updated draft for discussion on Tuesday 30 Nov 2004. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Workshop on Re-registration of Deleted Domain Names - 2pm - Wed 1 Dec 2004
by Bruce Tonkin Dec. 1, 2004

Dec. 1, 2004

Hello All, The papers for the Workshop on Re-registration of Deleted Domain Names Are available on the ICANN website at: http://www.icann.org/meetings/capetown/icann-domainnames-workshop-01dec0 4.htm Members of council that wish to attend would be welcome. Regards, Bruce

1 0