March 2006 - council - lists.icann.org

GNSO PDP new TLDS: Call for further information
by Liz Williams March 9, 2006

March 9, 2006

Dear Colleagues I have attached for your review a document which sets out a request for additional information on the technical selection criteria for new TLDs. The document focuses on four key questions around technical criteria which we discussed at some length at the Washington meeting. Could I ask you and your constituencies to come to Wellington with more detailed information about your positions (and the justification for those positions based on ICANN's mission and values)? We would then be able to move forward with discussions about the appropriateness of other selection criteria and allocation methods. I will be delivering to you all, I hope by the end of this week, an updated version of the new TLD Initial Report in which I have included Washington inputs and other information. I would expect to be working on that Initial Report during the two day session planned for 25 & 26 March. Kind regards and, of course, any questions come straight back to me. If necessary, we could add quick discussion of this document to the agenda for next week's Council call. Liz ..................................................... Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob

3 8

FW: Council resolution 13 Jan 05
by Marilyn Cade March 8, 2006

March 8, 2006

Dear Colleagues For those new, and some of us "old" councilors, there has been mention before of an existing pending request for an Issues Report on a topic that I believe is quite close to the one that Ross is proposing. A search of the minutes refreshed my memory and turned up the following relevant information/background [see below insert from minutes/with citation]. I suggest that those of us now exchanging views on this topic on the Council list, consider whether this existing/pending Issues Report will fulfill the need now being discussed, or if some fine tuning is needed to modify this resolution and update it. We wouldn't want to do two issues reports on the same topic and we should incorporate, or make a conscious decision to still have it pending, while we address the topic differently. If that is the will of Council. One thought about this resolution, as I reread it: in the second WHERAS, I suspect that the word in the MP3 recording was "accreditation", not "accredited", but that it was missed when this was proofed. :-) Yet, the meaning is quite clear. Ross, as the initial originator of the newest topic, can we build on this, incorporate it, etc.? Marilyn Cade --------------------------------------------------------- http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-13jan05.htm Item 7: Contention for domain names at gtld registries - motion to initiate an issues report Draft resolution Whereas the high demand amongst registrars on behalf of their registrants to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen strains on the ability of registries and registrars to manage their business efficiently, Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate. Philip Sheppard spoke to the resolution which arose out of a discussion in Cape Town regarding the problem of of the volume of automated requests for expiring domain names from registrar to registry and requested further study through an issues report from the ICANN Staff Manager so that Council could then decide whether a policy development process should be initiated. Ken Stubbs commented that the issues report should clarify the reason for the demand. Barbara Roseman reported that the staff recognized that the issue would require effort from several ICNAN staff members with specific areas of expertise Kurt Pritz commented that in order to respond to the resolution, ICANN would like to go back and look at the complaints received, and solicit input from the registries and registrars on the topic, then provide a briefing to the Council based on an analysis of various data bases to ascertain whether there should be an issues report. Bruce Tonkin clarified that an Issues Report asked General Counsel to decide whether there were any policy issues but it did not go as far as saying what specific agreements and contractual issues were affected and proposed that there should be further clarification on contents and expectations of issues report in general. Philip Sheppard, seconded by Maureen Cubberley proposed the amended draft resolution: Whereas the high demand amongst registrars to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen impact and strains on the registration infrastructure of gTLD registries and registrars. Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate Bruce Tonkin called for a nominated vote. 19 votes in favour, 5 proxy votes in favour, 3 no votes. (Kiyoshi Tsuru and Alick Wilson with the proxy for Demi Getschko had dropped off the call and did not vote) The motion carried. Decision 4: Whereas the high demand amongst registrars to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen impact and strains on the registration infrastructure of gTLD registries and registrars. Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate

1 0

RE: [council] GNSO: PDP management issues [note changed thread]
by Seo, June March 8, 2006

March 8, 2006

Hi Liz, The public comment period for the PDP on policies for contractual conditions on existing TLDs does not end until 28 March 2006 after which "(the) Staff Manager, or some other designated representative of ICANN shall review the public comments and incorporate them into a report (the "Public Comment Report") to be included in either the Preliminary Task Force Report or the Initial Report, as applicable" (ICANN Bylaws, Annex A, Section 6). Shouldn't the Council work on this PDP proceed after that step is completed? Thanks, June Seo -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Liz Williams Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 1:21 PM To: Marilyn Cade Cc: GNSO Council Subject: [council] GNSO: PDP management issues [note changed thread] Marilyn Thanks for your note. It is not my understanding that we are to devote any resources and time at all to the Feb 06 PCC: Existing TLDs PDP as part of the two day working session in Wellington. I have another email to the Council in preparation about the PCC-eTLD PDP which I was going to distribute tomorrow but I will send that out later tonight. From my side, it is entirely premature to be discussing the PCC-eTLD in Wellington. Advice from the GNSO Secretariat today indicates that the public comment period will be between 7 March - 27 March. On current estimations, 10 April is the deadline for constituency statements. I would encourage the Council to focus entirely on the new TLD PDP in the working sessions at the Wellington meetings. There is much good work to be done there and, in the background, I would hope that the constituencies would be preparing their statements which will then be folded into the PCC-eTLD Initial Report. Kind regards. Liz ..................................................... Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob On 08 Mar 2006, at 18:15, Marilyn Cade wrote: > Just one additional thought, since we have an "agreed" format with > numbering, etc, for ease of reference in discussion, would be > important to keep that also in mind as the further documents are > developed. > > Thanks, Liz, for the information about when we can expect the further > Initial Report--e.g., end of this week. Important to have it as soon > as you can, given the work that we are all trying to review before > flying to Wellington. :-) > > Just one thought, though. The intent of the working session is to > split the time over the two PDPs, as well as the meeting with the GAC > working group on gNSO. That may have been inherent in your email but > it sounded a bit like there was thought that the entire agenda is > given over to this particular pdp, and I don't believe that can be the > case. > > But of course, we are still developing the exact schedule of work for > Wellington. I would propose that we devote Saturday a.m. to this work, > and Saturday p.m. to the contractual terms PDP [sometimes called PDP > Feb-06]. > That will allow us to be prepared for our discussion Sunday a.m. > with the > GAC working group, and then we can return to work on the contractual > terms PDP on Sunday p.m, > > Best regards and thanks for the update. > > Marilyn Cade > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner- > council(a)gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Rader > Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 11:09 AM > To: Liz Williams > Cc: GNSO Council > Subject: Re: [council] GNSO PDP new TLDS: Call for further information > > In documents like this, it would be useful to augment citations with a > hyperlink to the referenced message or resource. It is difficult (or > impossible) for a layperson to read this document and benefit from the > larger context that these limited footnotes provide for. > > There are any number of online style guides that provide > recommendations for citing online sources ) - I heartily recommend > that staff choose one of these for future use - it will make these > documents eminently more readable, and therefore useful, for our > purposes. > > i.e. http://www.lib.duke.edu/libguide/cite/Turabian.htm > > [25] National Park Service, Abraham Lincoln Birthplace National > Historic Site, 11 February 2003, available from > http://www.nps.gov/abli/; Internet; accessed 13 February 2003. > > Liz Williams wrote: >> Dear Colleagues >> >> I have attached for your review a document which sets out a request >> for additional information on the technical selection criteria for >> new TLDs. >> >> The document focuses on four key questions around technical criteria >> which > we >> discussed at some length at the Washington meeting. >> >> Could I ask you and your constituencies to come to Wellington with >> more > detailed >> information about your positions (and the justification for those > positions >> based on ICANN's mission and values)? We would then be able to move > forward >> with discussions about the appropriateness of other selection >> criteria and > >> allocation methods. >> >> I will be delivering to you all, I hope by the end of this week, an > updated >> version of the new TLD /Initial Report/ in which I have included > Washington >> inputs and other information. >> >> I would expect to be working on that /Initial Report/ during the two >> day > session >> planned for 25 & 26 March. >> >> Kind regards and, of course, any questions come straight back to me. >> If necessary, we could add quick discussion of this document to the >> agenda > for next >> week's Council call. >> >> Liz >> ..................................................... >> >> Liz Williams >> Senior Policy Counselor >> ICANN - Brussels >> +32 2 234 7874 tel >> +32 2 234 7848 fax >> +32 497 07 4243 mob >> >> = >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> >> >> =

1 0

GNSO PDP: Policies for Contractual Conditions -- Existing TLDs
by Liz Williams March 8, 2006

March 8, 2006

Colleagues This note has been somewhat pre-empted by other discussion but I have included everything for clarity. ... I am going to lead from the staff side on the Policies for Contractual Conditions: Existing TLDs PDP (now known as PCC - eTLDs). You will have seen the public comment period notification posted on the ICANN website (http://icann.org/announcements/ announcement-06mar06.htm). From my side, here is what I understand we're doing (Glen has advised me of the correct dates according to the PDP Guidelines). Any corrections, please let me know as soon as you can. Appointment of Taskforce Representatives -- due now 7 March - 27 March -- public comment period. Note that 27 March is "constituency day" for the Wellington meeting. 10 April -- constituency statement deadline. I have attached a template which may help constituencies with both addressing the terms of reference and meeting the deadlines set under the PDP guidelines. Information presented in a consistent format will help me greatly when drafting the Initial Report. It also helps to see if and when agreement is reached on elements of a PDP. If there are consistent gaps in responses, I can then arrange a call for additional information to be provided. 20 April - Initial Report due -- I am taking some family leave over the Easter break and will not be back in the office until 24 April. I would ask the Council's indulgence that I distribute the Initial Report on Friday 28 April. Of course, if you have additional questions, please let me know. Kind regards. Liz ..................................................... Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob

1 0

Task force representatives
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

[To council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear All, On 16 February 2006 at the GNSO Council meeting it was resolved: "That the Council wishes to appoint a task force for the PDP initiated on 6 February 2006 (PDP-Feb06) that consists of the full Council, including the Council members appointed by the Nominating Committee, the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) liaisons. That constituencies have the option to appoint representatives to the task force in place of their Council members. That the Council recommends that the constituencies ensure that there is at least one council member from the constituency on the task force. That Council members, who are not members of the task force, have observer status on the task force, and thus receive mail from the mailing lists and be able to attend task force calls and meetings as observers." Could you please let me know by Friday 10 March 2006, who you have appointed to this task force. If you have appointed representatives in place of council members, please add their email contact details. Thank you very much for treating this request with urgency. Kind regards, Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Wellington schedule and agenda
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; ga[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear All, Please note that the Wellington schedule and agenda are published at: http://icann.org/meetings/wellington/#ScheduleandAgenda A detailed agenda specifically for the GNSO Council meetings will be sent out very shortly. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: EU commision examines .com contract
by Mawaki Chango March 7, 2006

March 7, 2006

FYI --- Iliya Nickelt <iliya(a)GMX.DE> wrote: > Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 09:31:05 +0100 > From: Iliya Nickelt <iliya(a)GMX.DE> > Subject: EU commision examines .com contract > To: NCUC-DISCUSS(a)LISTSERV.SYR.EDU > > FYI: A speaker from the competition directorate of the EU > commission > (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition) has confirmed that they are > > examining the ICANN verisign .com contract, apparently stimulated > by > CFIT. I don't think it has been widely noticed yet, as this > interesting > bit of info was researched by Monika Ermert from heise and the > article is > published in German. > (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/70352) I > did not find any comment at the eu site. Investigation does not > mean that > they will take any steps, of course, but still interesting. > > --iliya >

1 0

[Fwd: Wellington Hotel]
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 5, 2006

March 5, 2006

Dear Council Members, Please see the message below and please act promptly. All council members that have informed me of their dates are on the hotel list, with the exception of 4 council members that will not be attending. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Wellington Hotel Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 20:02:44 -0800 From: Michael Evans <evans(a)icann.org> To: 'GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG' <gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org> CC: 'Diane Schroeder' <diane.schroeder(a)icann.org> Dear Glen, Please send the following message to the people on your Wellington hotel list. Exemptions are as follows: (Marilyn, Tony Harris, Lucy Nichols, and Ken Stubbs are exempt as there reservation falls under the Nom-Com) Dear GNSO Council members. A hotel room has been reserved under your name at the Intercontinental Hotel in Wellington for the dates you provided. Due to requirements from the local hotel, a credit card is required to hold your reservation. Please e-mail the local hotel coordinator (*laura(a)conferenceonline.co.nz <mailto:laura@conferenceonline.co.nz>)* with your credit card details by Tues. March 7^th to avoid your reservation from being cancelled. Please include, once again, the dates of your arrival and departure from the hotel to be sure that the dates are correct. Beginning Tues. March 7^th , penalties may apply for changes to your reservation or cancellations. We apologize for any inconvenience and appreciate your understanding and cooperation. Best regards, Michael Evans -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Agenda Request
by Ross Rader March 5, 2006

March 5, 2006

Bruce, fellow Councillors, At our next meeting, I would like to propose the initiation of a new policy development process concerning the Redemption Grace Period and request that this topic be added to our agenda. It has recently come to my attention recently that the current implementation (detailed at http://www.icann.org/bucharest/redemption-topic.htm) is an optional registry service which may not be meeting the needs of registrants as originally envisaged when it was implemented. Recent press reports (see below) and registrant complaints indicate that names are being lost despite the implementation of this registry service. I have spent a lot of time considering whether or not Council can afford to take on additional work given our current workload and have come to the view that because of the widespread support for the Redemption Grace Period amongst the constituencies (as documented on the ICANN website) and the pre-existence of strong policy and implementation proposals that already have consensus support of the stakeholders, we should be able to confirm the Redemption Grace Period proposals as consensus policy fairly quickly and without much additional effort or contentious debate. Because of the pre-existing consensus on this issue, I will propose to move this forward without creating a task force per Annex A, Section 8 of the ICANN Bylaws once we have agreed to initiate a PDP and been provided with an issues report by the staff. (http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA-8) i.e. the fast-track. In the very least, creation of an issues report will gather up substantive data on this subject and allow us to make an informed decision regarding whether or not circumstances like those detailed below are widespread enough to justify launching a full-fledged PDP. Your consideration of this matter would be extremely appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to drop me a note (or give me a ring). -ross 'Drop Catchers' Buy and Sell Web Names Others Let Slip By DAVID KESMODEL Wall Street Journal February 22, 2006; Page B1 Last month, Chicago real-estate agent Judy Orr discovered that a Web site she used to showcase area homes had gone off-line. It turned out she had failed to pay the $9 annual renewal fee for her Web address, oak-lawn-real-estate.com. But getting her site back online wasn't as easy as she had hoped: Another company had snapped up the domain name and wanted nearly $2,500 to return it to her. "I was sick to my stomach," Ms. Orr says. It took two years of work to build up the site so it would rank prominently in Google's search results, and that time "went down the drain," she says. The new owner of the address was Lease Domains Inc., which is run by a 21-year-old graduate student, Anthos Chrysanthou, who works out of his parents' house in a Chicago suburb. Mr. Chrysanthou says his two-year-old company owns more than 2,000 domain names, many obtained through a process called "drop catching" -- snagging names owners have let expire, either accidentally or because they no longer want them. "I liken the whole situation to tangible real estate," says Mr. Chrysanthou, who is pursuing his master's in business administration at St. Xavier University in Chicago. "If you're not paying your mortgage or your taxes on it, it's going to get taken away." Mr. Chrysanthou is one of hundreds of drop catchers who either resell names or use them for Web sites loaded with advertisements. (Ms. Orr's former site now features text ads for real estate.) Many drop catchers have learned the trade in the past year, seeking a piece of the booming market for domains spurred by a surge in online advertising. The practice also has gotten a lift from providers of domain services, such as SnapNames.com Inc., Pool.com Inc. and GoDaddy.com Inc., which have introduced tools aimed at helping people grab expiring domains. The services circulate lists each day showing which domains are about to go up for grabs. Auctions are held for particularly in-demand names, and prices can go sky-high: A1.com sold for $260,250 in December, after its previous owner let the registration lapse. Drop catching "has pretty much changed completely in a few years' time," says Michael Berkens, who runs MostWantedDomains.com, owner of about 45,000 domains, which range from 4nudepictures.com to 401kplans.com, out of his Fort Lauderdale, Fla., home. "There's more people," he says, and "prices have just escalated." DNJournal.com, a publication that tracks the domain industry, reported 2,291 sales of expired domains in auctions last year, with winning bids totaling a combined $11.5 million. That was up from 885 sales totaling $4.2 million a year earlier. Auctioneers don't report all deals to DNJournal, and the site doesn't track deals valued at less than $500. Roughly 20,000 expired domain names become available each day, according to industry executives. While many were consciously discarded by their owners, others, like Ms. Orr's, are the product of a domain-registration system that many users don't understand well. When a user registers a domain name, it can be reserved for as many as 10 years, typically for $80. But many choose a one-year registration because it is less expensive, often about $10, and because they may not want the site for a longer period. At the end of the year, the domain registrar generally sends renewal notices to the owner, but such messages can be missed if the owner has changed email addresses in that time. Under rules administered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the group that oversees the assignment of Web addresses, domain registrars such as GoDaddy and Network Solutions LLC have as many as 45 days after the expiration date to notify the official domain registry whether a name is being renewed or deleted. Typically, registrars have given users a grace period -- sometimes as long as 45 days -- to renew their name. If a name is deleted, ICANN guidelines then call for a 30-day "redemption grace period," during which the original owner can still claim the name. If there is no claim in the redemption period, the name is dropped from the registry after a five-day holding period, and anyone is entitled to seek it. For the .com and .net registries, managed by VeriSign Inc., names drop starting around 2 p.m. Eastern each day, all year long. What follows is a process that some in the industry call "pounding." As the names drop, Internet companies that help users acquire expired names send rapid computer commands to the registry, seeking to grab the most valuable names. It is "a mad rush," says Dan Rubin, who runs justdropped.com, which helps people identify and acquire expired domains. Registries for other domain suffixes drop names at different times of day. The drop process underwent a key shift starting in late 2004. That is when SnapNames started a new service for grabbing domains. The company has signed exclusive agreements with more than a half-dozen registrars, including Network Solutions and Moniker.com, under which the registrars transfer expired domains to SnapNames, and SnapNames auctions them off. That way, names that people are interested in don't go through the traditional drop process that is open to anyone. GoDaddy, the largest domain registrar, has introduced its own auction service for expired names that were registered with it, as have other registrars, as they seek a cut of the action for expired names. They begin auctions for names even before the names have officially expired but warn auction participants that the original owner could still redeem the name. For domain owners, the new system means names can be grabbed from them even more quickly than they could before. Instead of going through the full deletion cycle -- which went as long as 75 days -- names are being transferred to new owners in 30 to 45 days. Paul Twomey, chief executive of ICANN, says some people in the domain industry recently have raised concerns that the guidelines governing expired names are "being utilized in ways that were not originally intended." But Mr. Twomey says no one has proposed a formal change in policy to address the issue. Ms. Orr's name, oak-lawn-real-estate.com, is one of those that was transferred before going through the full deletion process, says Jay Westerdal, who runs Name Intelligence Inc., a Bellevue, Wash., company that tracks the industry. Tim Ruiz, vice president of domain services for GoDaddy, which transferred the name, says, "We make every attempt to give ample opportunity for registrants to renew." He says the company gives registrants 30 days to claim a name after it has expired. If a corporation loses a domain name that it believes is copyrighted or trademarked, it can seek to recover the name by appealing to an arbitration panel under ICANN's dispute-resolution policy. It also could take the domain's new owner to court, though that can be more expensive. Ms. Orr says she lost her site's name, which wasn't copyrighted or trademarked, because she made the mistake of relying on her Web-hosting company to keep track of her registration. She says she didn't see renewal notices from GoDaddy because it had an old email address for her. Ms. Orr plans to use another site -- oak-lawn-il.com -- to replace the one she lost.

4 3

GNSO Council Dinner with the Board on Sunday evening 26 March 2006
by Bruce Tonkin March 4, 2006

March 4, 2006

Hello All, Diane Schroeder has confirmed that "the board would be pleased to have dinner with the GNSO Council on Sunday evening" for Sunday 26 March 2006 in Wellington. I will see if we can arrange this as more of a "working" dinner - ie with the ability to discuss the topics that were raised on the last Council call. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Re: [council] Agenda Request
by Marilyn Cade March 4, 2006

March 4, 2006

Let me lend my support to this. I have a special fondness for protecting registrants and welcome this move. I am sure that GAC members will be positive about the responsible initiation by the council. Regatds, marilyn -----Original Message----- From: Ross Rader <ross(a)tucows.com> Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:56:47 To:GNSO Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Agenda Request Bruce, fellow Councillors, At our next meeting, I would like to propose the initiation of a new policy development process concerning the Redemption Grace Period and request that this topic be added to our agenda. It has recently come to my attention recently that the current implementation (detailed at http://www.icann.org/bucharest/redemption-topic.htm) is an optional registry service which may not be meeting the needs of registrants as originally envisaged when it was implemented. Recent press reports (see below) and registrant complaints indicate that names are being lost despite the implementation of this registry service. I have spent a lot of time considering whether or not Council can afford to take on additional work given our current workload and have come to the view that because of the widespread support for the Redemption Grace Period amongst the constituencies (as documented on the ICANN website) and the pre-existence of strong policy and implementation proposals that already have consensus support of the stakeholders, we should be able to confirm the Redemption Grace Period proposals as consensus policy fairly quickly and without much additional effort or contentious debate. Because of the pre-existing consensus on this issue, I will propose to move this forward without creating a task force per Annex A, Section 8 of the ICANN Bylaws once we have agreed to initiate a PDP and been provided with an issues report by the staff. (http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA-8) i.e. the fast-track. In the very least, creation of an issues report will gather up substantive data on this subject and allow us to make an informed decision regarding whether or not circumstances like those detailed below are widespread enough to justify launching a full-fledged PDP. Your consideration of this matter would be extremely appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to drop me a note (or give me a ring). -ross 'Drop Catchers' Buy and Sell Web Names Others Let Slip By DAVID KESMODEL Wall Street Journal February 22, 2006; Page B1 Last month, Chicago real-estate agent Judy Orr discovered that a Web site she used to showcase area homes had gone off-line. It turned out she had failed to pay the $9 annual renewal fee for her Web address, oak-lawn-real-estate.com. But getting her site back online wasn't as easy as she had hoped: Another company had snapped up the domain name and wanted nearly $2,500 to return it to her. "I was sick to my stomach," Ms. Orr says. It took two years of work to build up the site so it would rank prominently in Google's search results, and that time "went down the drain," she says. The new owner of the address was Lease Domains Inc., which is run by a 21-year-old graduate student, Anthos Chrysanthou, who works out of his parents' house in a Chicago suburb. Mr. Chrysanthou says his two-year-old company owns more than 2,000 domain names, many obtained through a process called "drop catching" -- snagging names owners have let expire, either accidentally or because they no longer want them. "I liken the whole situation to tangible real estate," says Mr. Chrysanthou, who is pursuing his master's in business administration at St. Xavier University in Chicago. "If you're not paying your mortgage or your taxes on it, it's going to get taken away." Mr. Chrysanthou is one of hundreds of drop catchers who either resell names or use them for Web sites loaded with advertisements. (Ms. Orr's former site now features text ads for real estate.) Many drop catchers have learned the trade in the past year, seeking a piece of the booming market for domains spurred by a surge in online advertising. The practice also has gotten a lift from providers of domain services, such as SnapNames.com Inc., Pool.com Inc. and GoDaddy.com Inc., which have introduced tools aimed at helping people grab expiring domains. The services circulate lists each day showing which domains are about to go up for grabs. Auctions are held for particularly in-demand names, and prices can go sky-high: A1.com sold for $260,250 in December, after its previous owner let the registration lapse. Drop catching "has pretty much changed completely in a few years' time," says Michael Berkens, who runs MostWantedDomains.com, owner of about 45,000 domains, which range from 4nudepictures.com to 401kplans.com, out of his Fort Lauderdale, Fla., home. "There's more people," he says, and "prices have just escalated." DNJournal.com, a publication that tracks the domain industry, reported 2,291 sales of expired domains in auctions last year, with winning bids totaling a combined $11.5 million. That was up from 885 sales totaling $4.2 million a year earlier. Auctioneers don't report all deals to DNJournal, and the site doesn't track deals valued at less than $500. Roughly 20,000 expired domain names become available each day, according to industry executives. While many were consciously discarded by their owners, others, like Ms. Orr's, are the product of a domain-registration system that many users don't understand well. When a user registers a domain name, it can be reserved for as many as 10 years, typically for $80. But many choose a one-year registration because it is less expensive, often about $10, and because they may not want the site for a longer period. At the end of the year, the domain registrar generally sends renewal notices to the owner, but such messages can be missed if the owner has changed email addresses in that time. Under rules administered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the group that oversees the assignment of Web addresses, domain registrars such as GoDaddy and Network Solutions LLC have as many as 45 days after the expiration date to notify the official domain registry whether a name is being renewed or deleted. Typically, registrars have given users a grace period -- sometimes as long as 45 days -- to renew their name. If a name is deleted, ICANN guidelines then call for a 30-day "redemption grace period," during which the original owner can still claim the name. If there is no claim in the redemption period, the name is dropped from the registry after a five-day holding period, and anyone is entitled to seek it. For the .com and .net registries, managed by VeriSign Inc., names drop starting around 2 p.m. Eastern each day, all year long. What follows is a process that some in the industry call "pounding." As the names drop, Internet companies that help users acquire expired names send rapid computer commands to the registry, seeking to grab the most valuable names. It is "a mad rush," says Dan Rubin, who runs justdropped.com, which helps people identify and acquire expired domains. Registries for other domain suffixes drop names at different times of day. The drop process underwent a key shift starting in late 2004. That is when SnapNames started a new service for grabbing domains. The company has signed exclusive agreements with more than a half-dozen registrars, including Network Solutions and Moniker.com, under which the registrars transfer expired domains to SnapNames, and SnapNames auctions them off. That way, names that people are interested in don't go through the traditional drop process that is open to anyone. GoDaddy, the largest domain registrar, has introduced its own auction service for expired names that were registered with it, as have other registrars, as they seek a cut of the action for expired names. They begin auctions for names even before the names have officially expired but warn auction participants that the original owner could still redeem the name. For domain owners, the new system means names can be grabbed from them even more quickly than they could before. Instead of going through the full deletion cycle -- which went as long as 75 days -- names are being transferred to new owners in 30 to 45 days. Paul Twomey, chief executive of ICANN, says some people in the domain industry recently have raised concerns that the guidelines governing expired names are "being utilized in ways that were not originally intended." But Mr. Twomey says no one has proposed a formal change in policy to address the issue. Ms. Orr's name, oak-lawn-real-estate.com, is one of those that was transferred before going through the full deletion process, says Jay Westerdal, who runs Name Intelligence Inc., a Bellevue, Wash., company that tracks the industry. Tim Ruiz, vice president of domain services for GoDaddy, which transferred the name, says, "We make every attempt to give ample opportunity for registrants to renew." He says the company gives registrants 30 days to claim a name after it has expired. If a corporation loses a domain name that it believes is copyrighted or trademarked, it can seek to recover the name by appealing to an arbitration panel under ICANN's dispute-resolution policy. It also could take the domain's new owner to court, though that can be more expensive. Ms. Orr says she lost her site's name, which wasn't copyrighted or trademarked, because she made the mistake of relying on her Web-hosting company to keep track of her registration. She says she didn't see renewal notices from GoDaddy because it had an old email address for her. Ms. Orr plans to use another site -- oak-lawn-il.com -- to replace the one she lost. Regards, Marilyn Cade

2 1

Registrar Statement on New gTLD Terms of Reference
by Ross Rader March 3, 2006

March 3, 2006

Please find attached the registrar statement on the new gTLD Terms of Reference. There is no material difference between this and the earlier submission, save and except the preamble which has been modified to provide you with a clear statement concerning how this submission qualifies as a formal constituency statement under the ICANN bylaws. I am concerned that despite my repeated clarifications for staff, that this submission continues to be mishandled. If there are any further concerns, I would prefer to hear about them before you bring the issue before council. -Ross

2 1

GNSO Council teleconference MP3 recording 2 March 2006
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

[To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on March 2, 2006 at: http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20060302.mp3 http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html#mar Happy listening! -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council motion 2 March 2006
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

[To council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear All, Ahead of complete minutes of the GNSO Council teleconference held on 2 March 2006, Council passed the following motion: "That Council approves the Terms of Reference for PDP-Feb06 as drafted with the insertion of the words "and core values" in the paragraph on Goal "The overall goal of this PDP therefore is to determine what policies are appropriate, for the long term future of gTLDs within the context of ICANN's mission "and core values," that relate to the issues identified in the specific terms of reference below. The motion carried with 17 votes in favour, 6 votes against Absent: Robin Gross, absent and excused: Ute Decker, Lucy Nichols, and Kiyoshi Tsuru had dropped off the call at the time of the vote. There were 18 Council members on the call. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Website for GNSO Review
by Bruce Tonkin March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

Hello All, See: http://www.icann-gnsoreview.org/ Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

Details of people from the London School of Economics Public Policy Group
by Bruce Tonkin March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

From: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/LSEPublicPolicy/whosWho.htm Professor Patrick Dunleavy - Chair of PPG Patrick Dunleavy is Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science, where he has worked since 1979. He was educated at Corpus Christi College and Nuffield College, Oxford, where he gained his D.Phil. He has authored and edited numerous books on political science theory, British politics and urban politics, as well as more than 50 articles in professional journals. His current research includes a seven country study of how central governments relate to the IT industry for the UK's Economic and Social Research Council. More information: Experts entry Contact details: Room K300, 020 7955 7178, p.dunleavy(a)lse.ac.uk Patricia Bartholomeou - Assistant Researcher Patricia works part-time for PPG as a researcher on various projects. She is also manager of the LSE Internships Programme. She has a degree in Politics from York University and is currently working towards an MSc degree in Political Sociology at the LSE. Contact details: Room L302, 020 7955 6731, p.bartholomoeu(a)lse.ac.uk Simon Bastow - Senior Research Fellow Simon has worked at the LSE since January 2005. He was previously at the School of Public Policy, University College London. Educated at Manchester University in languages he later changed direction, taking an MSc in Comparative Politics at LSE and is completing his PhD in political science. He has published in UK public policy and electoral analysis and co-authored the Government on the Web II report (2002). Contact details: Room Q503, 020 7107 5246, s.j.bastow(a)lse.ac.uk Oliver Pearce - Editor and Researcher Oliver joined the PPG team in June 2004. He works on the 'cold reviewing' contract for the National Audit Office. He also works as a researcher on some PPG projects, for example the Citizen Redress report for the NAO. He has a BSc in Government from the LSE and an MPhil in Development Studies from Sussex University. Contact details: Room L302, 020 7955 6731, o.pearce(a)lse.ac.uk Jane Tinkler - PPG Manager / Researcher Jane has been PPG Manager since September 2005. She is also actively involved in research projects undertaken by PPG. Previous to this, she was Managing Editor of the journals, Political Studies and Political Studies Review for six years. She also was a Research Fellow in the School of Public Policy, University College London. Her first degree was in psychology and business at Leeds University and she later took an MSc at Birkbeck College, University of London. She has published in UK public policy and worked on the Citizen Redress report (2004). Contact details: Room L301, 020 7955 6064, j.tinkler(a)lse.ac.uk

1 0

FW: Registry Constituency statement concerning the PDP Feb 06
by Bruce Tonkin March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

-----Original Message----- From: Marie.Zitkova Sent: Thursday, 2 March 2006 2:40 AM To: Bruce Tonkin Subject: Registry Constituency statement concerning the PDP Feb 06 Dear Bruce, Please find enclosed gTLD Registry Constituency statement concerning the PDP Feb 06 now under discussion in the Council. The statement and its preface were discussed during the past two weeks on the mailing list and during regular calls of the constituency. Our position was adopted during our call yesterday, Verisign abstained. Best regards, Marie (See attached file: Preface to RyC Comments on PDP Feb-06.doc)(See attached file: RyC Comments on PDP Feb-06.DOC) Marie Zitkova Chair, gTLD Registries Construency

2 1

Statements of Interest for all GNSO Councillors 2,March 2006
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council Members, Please find the updated Statements of Interest for all the GNSO councillors. The last statement added was from Norbert Klein. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen GNSO Council members Updated Statements of Interest 20 February 2006 Bruce Tonkin - Registrar Constituency - GNSO Council chair I am employed full-time as Chief Technology Officer by Melbourne IT Limited. Melbourne IT has a registrar accreditation agreement with ICANN. Melbourne IT also has a contractual relationship with most gtld registries (for a current list see http://www.icann.org/registrars/accredited-list.html) and many cctld registries as a registrar. Melbourne IT holds ten percent of the shares in Neulevel, the operator of the .biz registry. .................................................................... Ross Rader - - Registrar Constituency I am the Director of Research and Innovation for Tucows Inc., an ICANN accredited registrar and Internet services vendor. Tucows is a minority shareholder in Afilias LLC, with roughly an 8% shareholding. Neither Tucows, nor I, is in possession of, nor have access to Registry Sensitive or Registry Proprietary information as defined by any relevant registry operating contracts as a result of this relationship. Tucows provides consulting and application hosting services to other registrars and Internet services providers. I am not an officer, director, consultant, or employee of any of these customer organizations nor am I specifically involved in providing services to them. The URL for this statement is: http://www.byte.org/blog/_WebPages/StatementofInterestsforRossRader.html ........................................................................ Thomas Keller - - Registrar Constituency I'm a fulltime employee of Schlund+Partner AG. Schlund+Partner AG is ICANN accredited and is conducting business with almost all major gTLDS and ccTLDs. Schlund holds a minority share in Afilias LLC for investment purposes.Besides domain name registrations Schlund is mainly offering webhosting and email services to end users. I'm a member of the DENIC Technical Advisory Council. ....................................................................... Philip Sheppard - Commercial and Business Users Constituency I am Public Affairs Manager for AIM - European Brands Association, a Brussels-based trade association involved in public affairs activities. AIM represents the branded goods industries in Europe on key issues which affect the ability of brand manufacturers to design, distribute and market their brands. AIM's membership groups 1800 companies of all sizes through corporate members and national associations in 21 countries. These companies are mostly active in every day consumer goods. AIM's mission is to create for brands an environment of fair and vigorous competition, fostering innovation and guaranteeing maximum value to consumers. I hold various non-remunerated directorships unrelated to ICANN. I am a contact point for several domain names. Honorary positions: - President elect 2007 International Public Relations Association (IPRA), the global professional association for the PR profession. - I am a Freeman of the City of London. ...................................................................... Marilyn Cade - Commercial and Business Users Constituency I am an elected officer and councilor from the Commercial and Business Users Constituency (BC). I own and manage a consulting business that is primarily focused on Internet Governance and convergence issues involving Internet infrastructure and applications. My business is focused at the nexus of global policy and technological convergence. The topics I address include, but are not limited to: Internet Governance, VoIP, IP-TV, Data Retention, Internet intermediary liability, SPAM, ICANN, and cyber security in IP networks. I chair the Global Public Policy Committee at ITAA, and I advise the Global IP Alliance on international VoIP and Internet Governance. I also convene and coordinate various industry events and meetings on a variety of topics, primarily focused on working with industry to advocate policy positions to various governments and multi lateral organizations, including the OECD, ITU, CITEL, and APEC. I speak frequently as an expert at business and professional conferences that are held both in the US and in other countries and am usually remunerated for such events. Such remuneration does not in any way make such entities clients, nor imply client obligations. The clients of my business are concerned about the security and stability of the Internet, are registrants and users of the Internet, and are strong advocates of ICANN’s role in managing and coordinating the technical aspects of the Internet. I do not believe that I have conflicts of interest with ICANN. From time to time, I may have clients who have a direct policy interest in a particular policy area. At present, two clients that I advise have an interest in reserved names in gTLDs. As my business’ clients and their interests change, I will continue to update my statement of interest ......................................................................... Grant Forsyth - Commercial and Business Users constituency I am one of three representatives from the Business Constituency on the ICANN GNSO Names Council. I am currently employed by TelstraClear in the role of Manager Industry and Regulatory Affairs. TelstraClear is a full-service telecommunications operator that operates two ISPs, ClearNet and ParadiseNet. TelstraClear is an accredited registrar of .nz ccTLD names only under the new InternetNZ SRS. While TelstraClear presently makes no use of ENUM, it has an interest in its potential and an expectation that in due course it may wish to offer commercial services that use ENUM. I am elected Councillor of InternetNZ, the delegated .nz ccTLD manager. I have a personal domain registered in the .gen.nz space. I have not undertaken any paid work for either ICANN or InternetNZ. I have not worked for nor represented an ICANN Registry or ICANN Accredited Registrar. ............................................................................. Anthony Harris - ISPCP Constituency I am under contract as full time executive director of CABASE, a non-profit Internet industry association, incorporated as such in Argentina since 1999. - consulting work done for ICANN - NONE - consulting work done for a gtld or cctld registry, or current applicant to become a gtld or cctld registry - NONE - consulting work done for a registrar - NONE - employment with a registry or registrar - NONE .......................................................................... Greg Ruth - ISPCP Constituency I am employed full time by Verizon Federal Network Systems. Verizon has no contractual relationships with any registries or registrars. ......................................................................... Tony Holmes - ISPCP Constituency I am employed within BT Group's Chief Technology Office with the responsibility for determining numbering, naming and addressing policy and strategy for BT Group PLC. BT is a large ISP and infrastructure provider and operates in many countries across the world. BT is also an accredited ICANN Registrar, but is not currently operational. I participate in, and hold official positions in a number of other technology focused technical and policy making bodies at both the national and international level, none of which cause conflict with my work in ICANN. I have no employment, contract, financial interest or other business relationship with ICANN, registries or registrars except BT. I am an elected representative of the ISP and Connectivity Providers Constituency to the GNSO. ........................................................................... Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users Constituency I have no conflicts of interest. ...................................................................... Norbert Klein – Non-Commercial Users Constituency I am at present a consultant to a Cambodian non-government organization, the Open Forum of Cambodia, which was created in 1994 to facilitate and to foster communication – not only electronic communication – in the conflictive, post-civil war Cambodian society. My relation to the Internet, and since 1999 to ICANN, originated from the fact that I created in 1994 the first possibility for people in Cambodia to have access to e-mail, and in 1996 I created the possibility to have an e-mail address in Cambodia: .kh Neither I nor the Open Forum of Cambodia have registered a top level domain – we use a secondary domain for our organization, under the ccTLD of Cambodia, .kh For myself, I use a webmail account by the German provider GMX, a GMX ProMail account, for which I pay the normal set fees. Neither we as an organization, nor I as an individual, own or have in any other way an economic interest in any IT or ICT company or related holding. ........................................................................... Mawaki Chango - Non Commercial Users Constituency I am currently a full-time Ph.D. student and Graduate Assistant, and I represent the Non-Commercial Users Constituency on the GNSO Council. In addition, I am involved in social activism through my participation in ACSIS (African Civil Society for Information Society), as ICT policy advocator, and advisor to the ACSIS’ President. Over the last five years, I have been involved as a consultant with UNESCO, the International Development Research Centre, Open Society Initiative for West Africa (Dakar), the Eduardo Mondlane University (Maputo), and EvalNet (Johannesburg). I have never been involved in any business related to the distribution and operation of Internet resources. ....................................................................... Sophia Bekele - Nominations Committee appointee to the GNSO Council I represent a California based, privately held company, CBS Enterprise Group, which is engaged in international business. As part of its portfolio of services, the company provides systems integration services through CBS International, which delivers domain registration, web hosting and email services to end users via a reseller, agreement with registrars. Less than 10% of CBS's business is derived from these services. In my personal capacity, I do not have any of my moneys, invested in companies that are in the registrar businesses. I do not believe that any activities of the Council or ICANN could have a material effect on the work I do at CBS International. .................................................................... Avri Doria - Nominations Committee appointee to the GNSO Council I am an independent research consultant and have no employment, contract, financial interest, share ownership or any other business relationship with ICANN, registries or registrars except as a holder, and fee payer, of several domain names in .com, .net and .org ...................................................................... Maureen Cubberley - Nominations Committee appointee to the GNSO Council Statement of Interest related to ICANN and the work of the GNSO Council I am a Canadian and I am currently employed in Canada by the Department of Culture, Heritage and Tourism, Government of Manitoba, as the Director of Public Library Services. I am also a senior partner in the consulting firm ASM Advanced Strategic Management Consultants, based in Ontario, Canada. I hold several non-remunerated directorships for various not-for-profit organizations. None of these organizations are related to ICANN. In the past, I have been a Director and the Chair of the Board of Directors of the .ca ccTLD registry CIRA. As a current holder of several .ca domain names, I am a member of CIRA. Consulting work done for ICANN - NONE Consulting work done for a gtld -NONE or cctld registry, - In 2004 I provided consulting services to CIRA. or current applicant to become a gtld or cctld registry - NONE Consulting work done for a registrar - NONE Employment with a registry or registrar - NONE In 2004, I served as Chair of the Business and Financial Evaluation Team, the members of which were appointed by ICANN for the purpose of reviewing 10 applications for new Sponsored gTLDs. ICANN provided each of the Team members, including myself, with an honourarium. I have no financial interest, share ownership or any other business relationship with ICANN, registries or registrars except as a holder of domain names. .............................................................................. Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests Constituency I am an elected representative of the Intellectual Property Constituency to the GNSO. I am an attorney and currently hold the position of Global Director of Intellectual Property Rights, Brand Protection Portfolio, for Nokia Inc. Nokia Corporation is an investor and Board Member of Mobile Top Level Domain "mTLD", the registry for .mobi. My responsibilities include managing the trademark, domain name, product design and brand enforcement groups of Nokia Corporation. I am a member of the 2006 Nominating Committee of ICANN. I am also on the Board of Directors for the International Trademark Assn. and a member of other IPR related professional organizations including ECTA, AIPLA, and IPO. .......................................................................... Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests Constituency I am full time employed as Deputy Director for Global Legal Policy by the IFPI Secretariat. I am also elected representative of the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) to the GNSO Council. The IFPI Secretariat is the head office of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) representing the recording industry worldwide. IFPI is a non-commercial private sector non-governmental organisation, funded through membership contributions. IFPI is a member of the IPC. IFPI’s members are 1415 record companies, including EMI Music, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Music, and Universal Music and many independent record companies. The IFPI Secretariat provides services to its member and to 48 affiliated national recording industry bodies; and is responsible for co-ordinating international strategies in the key areas of the organisation's work: enforcement of copyright and trademarks, advice on technology and legal developments, relations with governments and national industry bodies, representation in international organisations, litigation, market research, and public relations. .................................................................... Kiyoshi I. Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests Constituency I, the undersigned, Kiyoshi I. Tsuru am a partner with the law firm of BELLO, GALLARDO, MORALES Y TSURU, S.C., in Mexico City. I specialize in Intellectual Property matters. I serve as a member of the Advisory Committee of NIC Mexico, which is in turn a member of the ccNSO of ICANN. From time to time, I have served as outside counsel to NIC Mexico. I am the country manager for Mexico of the Business Software Alliance (BSA) and a WIPO Panelist regarding disputes between domain names and trademarks. ........................................................................ Ken Stubbs - gTLD Registries constituency I am a Director of, and member of the Executive committee of Afilias, Limited. - an ICANN-contracted registry I am also a member of the Policy Advisory Board of the DotMobi Ltd. (operator of the ".mobi" registry). I am an elected representative of the Registry Constituency to the GNSO council and a member of the Nominating Committee In my personal capacity, I have less than 5% of my net worth invested in companies that are involved in ICANN-contracted registry services Other than the entities listed above, I have no other current or "executory" business or contractual relationships with any entity or individuals who currently have business before the GNSO or ICANN. ....................................................................... Cary Karp - gTLD Registries constituency I am Director of Internet Strategy and Technology at the Swedish Museum of Natural History (NRM), an agency of the Swedish government. This is a full-time salaried position. I serve in a similar capacity for the International Council of Museums (ICOM) of which I am an individual member and NRM is an institutional member. I receive a small additional honorarium for that activity. I hold a non-remunerated position as the President and CEO of the Museum Domain Management Association (MuseDoma), the Sponsoring Organization for the .museum TLD. NRM is the largest museum in Sweden and charged with advising private and corporate entities in that country in matters relating to its sphere of expertise. I am regularly involved in such action. Current activity includes a joint initiative with NIC-SE, the operator of the .se ccTLD, which is collaborating with NRM in a project in the context of the Swedish national "Year of Cultural Diversity 2006". I also advise NIC-SE in general matters relating to IDN. I may from time to time receive separate honoraria for advisory services provided as a result of my position at NRM, and may be similarly compensated for writing and speaking engagements. ICOM is an NGO maintaining formal relations with UNESCO and having consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. I am directly involved in activity conducted by ICOM in its relationship with UNESCO. I represent MuseDoma in the gTLD Registry Constituency and am the elected representative for the sTLDs on the GNSO Council. I conduct no other activity with, and have no other interests of any kind that involve, entities maintaining business or contractual relationships with ICANN. .................................................................... June Seo - gTLD Registries constituency I am an employee of VeriSign, Inc., which provides certain domain registration services (directly or through its subsidiaries) for a number of top-level domains, including the following: .com; .net; .jobs; .cc; .tv; .bz. In my personal capacity I have less than 5% of my net worth invested in companies that are involved in registration services for top level domains. I am also an elected representative of the gTLD Registry Constituency to the ICANN GNSO Council. To the best of my knowledge, I have no ownership interest in any entity that currently has business before the GNSO or ICANN, other than as described above. ......................................................................... Bret Fausett - At Large Advisory Committee representative to the GNSO Council I am an attorney, living and working in Los Angeles, licensed to practice law in California (United States). I serve on the GNSO as a liaison from the At Large Advisory Committee, which is charged with representing the interests of end users in all of ICANN's activities. I do not accept legal or consulting work for companies that have business before the GNSO or ICANN. In my personal capacity, I have less than 20% of my savings invested in companies that are in the registry services and registrar businesses, including Tucows, Verisign, and Neustar. I do not believe that any activities of the Council or ICANN could have a material effect on the value of my investments. ...................................................................... -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Regarding GNSO Review
by Bruce Tonkin March 2, 2006

March 2, 2006

Hello All, With respect to the Council call on 2 March 2006, I would like to allocate the first 20 minutes on the call for Dr Liz Williams and some representatives from the London School of Economics Public Policy Group to update the Council on the plan for the GNSO review - ie when/where interviews may take place etc. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

2 1

GNSO Review: Board Resolution
by Liz Williams March 1, 2006

March 1, 2006

Dear Colleagues My apologies -- I should have put this in my updated email to you yesterday -- in answer to Ross' question. The full Board resolution approving the Reviewer's contract is found at http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-21feb06.htm. In particular, "Resolved (06.__), the President and the General Counsel are authorized to engage the London School of Economics Public Policy Group to conduct the GNSO Review according to the terms set out in their proposal, with expenditures not to exceed US$150,000." Kind regards. Liz ..................................................... Liz Williams Senior Policy Counselor ICANN - Brussels +32 2 234 7874 tel +32 2 234 7848 fax +32 497 07 4243 mob

3 4

Wellington Hotel accommodation
by GNSO.SECRETARIAT＠GNSO.ICANN.ORG March 1, 2006

March 1, 2006

(To: council[at]gnso.icann.org] Dear Council Members, As requested, 21 rooms were reserved at the Intercontinental Hotel in Wellington so that councillors could be in the same hotel. I would be most grateful if you could let me know before the call tomorrow, off the council list, whether the reservations should be held. Please let me know if your plans have changed very recently. The hotel requires this information in order to release unused rooms. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen -- Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat - ICANN gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0