November 2010 - council - lists.icann.org

The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is Available for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 13, 2010

Nov. 13, 2010

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-12nov10-en.htm The Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook is Available for Public Comment http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-5-en.htm 12 November 2010 Guidebook and Public Comment Forum ICANN is pleased to publish the Proposed Final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook that describes the process of applying for new generic top-level domains. The Guidebook was released today along with explanatory memoranda and detailed analysis of comments received on version 4 of the Applicant Guidebook. This Proposed Final version of the Guidebook is the result of a tremendous amount of participation and thoughtful feedback from the ICANN stakeholder community. Their contribution is evidenced through the product of several working groups - bringing key issues to resolution. During the 10 December Board Meeting in Cartagena the ICANN Board will take into account this work and comments received to make a decision regarding the timing of the launch of the New gTLD Program. The Board can approve the Guidebook or direct that changes be made. Upon approval of the final version of the Guidebook, a four-month global communications campaign will be undertaken. The aim of this campaign is to ensure potential participants in all regions of the world are aware of program details and how to apply. The Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook - What changed from version 4? Module 1 * Eliminated most restrictions on Registrar cross-ownership - based on recent Board decision - see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm * Added information on application batching, delegation rates, dependencies for root scaling * Refocused background screening criteria only on business, criminal background, and cybersquatting * Added placeholder for outcomes on Applicant Support Working Group - see this Working Group milestone report here: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11nov10-en.htm Module 2 * Updated string requirements section per anticipated RFC 1123 revisions, which addresses the use of numbers in TLDs * Added UNESCO list as reference for continent/region names Module 3 * Incorporated Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) into Legal Rights Objection * Eliminated the complete defense to Community Objections in favor of elevated standard for successful objection * Included several recommendations from the "Rec 6 Working Group" dealing with the morality and public order objection Module 4 - no significant changes Module 5 * Added explanation of ICANN Board's role in the new gTLD process in accordance with Board Resolution 2.7 - Sept 26 2010 See: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.7 Other Documents to be finalized and posted soon include: * The Economic Analysis of program costs and benefits We continue to incorporate work done by cross stakeholder working groups in the areas of: morality and public order objections; and recommendations suggested by the Applicant Support Working Group. Upcoming Program Events During the December ICANN Meeting in Cartagena, Colombia there will be several program sessions, including: * New gTLD Program Status Update * New gTLD Basics - in Spanish and English * Developing Economies and the New gTLD Program * Sessions with updates on "overarching issues" including: Economic Analysis; Trademark Protections, Mitigation of Malicious Conduct; and Root Zone Scaling For final schedule and remote participation access information see: http://cartagena39.icann.org/sched-overview Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Council Chair Election
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

I want to thank Olga and Stéphane for their willingness to serve the GNSO community as Chair if elected and also thank them for submitting their candidate statements. In our Council meeting next week a brief amount of time will be allotted for Councilors to ask both candidates any questions you may have. As usual we have a very full agenda so we will have limited time for candidate questions. Therefore, I want to request that if anyone has questions that may require longer responses, please submit those on the list in advance of the meeting so that Olga and Stéphane can respond on the list before the meeting. That will then provide opportunity for follow-up questions if needed. I look forward to a successful Chair election process. Chuck

1 0

FW: Nomination of Stephane Van Gelder
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Please note the confirmation from David Maher, RysG Chair, of the nomination made by the Contracted Party House of Stephane Van Gelder made earlier in the week by Tim Ruiz. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: David W. Maher [mailto:dmaher@pir.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:13 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Subject: Nomination of Stephane Van Gelder Chuck: This will confirm that the Contracted Party House, pursuant to agreement between the Registrar Stakeholder Group and the Registries Stakeholder Group, nominates Stephane Van Gelder for the post of Chair of the GNSO Council. David David W. Maher Senior Vice President - Law & Policy .ORG, The Public Interest Registry 1775 Wiehle Ave, #200 Reston, VA 20190 USA (v) +1-312-876-8055 (f) +1-312-876-7934 http://www.pir.org <https://mail.pir.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.pir.org/> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and deleting this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.

2 1

Announcement from JAS working group
by Rafik Dammak Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

Hi, regarding the JAS working, an announcement was just posted at ICANN website about the milestone report http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11nov10-en.htm Regards Rafik Developing Economies and the New gTLD Program 11 November 2010 A message from the JAS WG: The *Milestone Report<http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/jas-milestone-report-11nov10-en.pdf> * [PDF, 1.2 MB] and accompanying Addenda<http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/jas-milestone-report-addenda-10nov10-e…> [PDF, 1.07 MB] published for public comment today deals with a very important issue: *how can ICANN assist applicants from developing economies to increase their participation in the new generic Top-Level Domain (New gTLD) Program?* A Working Group (WG) formed by ICANN stakeholders has been working since April 2010 to address this issue. This followed a Resolution<http://icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm> from ICANN Board of Directors in Nairobi, on March 2010 that asked ICANN’s stakeholder community *"...to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs."* Here are some basic aspects of this important work. 1. *What is this all about? What is a Milestone Report?* The Milestone Report is a document produced by this Working Group that offers recommendations on how ICANN should develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants from developing economies requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs Registries. The Report proposes initial criteria for qualification as well as several other types of support to be considered, for example, technical, informational. Although this work presents the foundation for ICANN to establish a *Support Development Program* dedicated to this issue, the work is not final yet. This report is going to be considered by the Board, staff and ICANN’s supporting chartering organizations. This initiative is related to the New gTLD Program, which in the near future will allow entities from around the world to apply for a generic top-level domain. The applicants passing the evaluation process, will sign a contract with ICANN and run a Registry. 2. *Who is being considered to receive support? Who benefits from this?* The Working Group is proposing the following group to be eligible for support once the "need" criterion is met: - Community-based applications such as cultural, linguistic and ethnic; - Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs), civil society and not-for-profit organizations; - Applicants geographically located in emerging markets/developing countries; - Applications in languages whose presence on the web is limited; - Entrepreneurs wanting to serve a developing market that might not be sustainable under the current cost structure. At this phase, the Working Group has not adopted any specific classification for developing economies and recommends using a classification that is internationally agreed upon, for example, G-77 or United Nations or World Bank classifications. We all benefit from this initiative. The Internet belongs to all as well as the responsibility to look into effective ways to reduce the Digital Divide, in this particular case, by delivering a sustainable and critical support for applicants from developing economies and looking for a solution not only at the application phase but also through to the initial years of these new Registry operators. 3. *Why is it important?* It is important because the Internet is a virtual real estate that belongs to everyone. Entities from around the world should be able to increase their participation in the top-level expansion. The Working Group also stresses it is important not only to increase participation from developing economies, but also to increase the likelihood of success by these new participants that will be delivering Domain Name Services (DNS). The current New gTLD Program, as design, has an evaluation (and several other fees) that are considered high for a significant number of potential participants from around the world. Besides the issue of high fees, the program is in English only and has an evaluation process with criteria and requirements that are quite complex to navigate. 4. *What are the highlights of this report?* This report approached the issue of accessibility from several angles. First, there are recommendations to lower the fees for applicants the meet the criteria recommended by this group. The initial focus is on a relatively limited and identifiable set of potential applicants that is often considered not controversial to support. The main criterion for eligibility is "need". The detailed definition of financial need and the method for determining the needs of an application will be part of a continued work. 5. *Who is part of this Working Group?* This Working Group, also called Joint SO/AC WG on New gTLD Applicant Support or simply "JAS WG", is comprised of highly respected and experienced volunteers from the Supporting Organization and the Advisory Committee. This all-volunteer group teleconferences twice each week, and works through a wiki and mailing lists. These active contributors are located in Australia, Africa, Europe and North America. 6. *What happens next?* Few things will happen in the upcoming months: - The general public is strongly encouraged to participate in the public forum that can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-mil…<http://icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-milesto…> - The Board, staff, supporting organizations will review the Milestone Report and public comments received. - The Supporting organizations and Board will allow for the continuation of this initiative, which means that this or a new Working Group will carry this work to a next phase. - Staff *might* initiate working on the *Support Development Program*, depending on the Board’s direction. 7. *How can one get involved?* One way to get involved is to provide a feedback using ICANN’s public comment forum. This is one of the ways ICANN listens to the global Internet community. You can find the link to this forum here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-mil…<http://icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-milesto…>. The public forum will close on *15 December 2010*. If you feel strongly about this (and other Internet related issues) attend ICANN Meetings – in person or remotely. The next one is in Cartagena <http://cartagena39.icann.org/> beginning of December). 8. *Where to find more information?* Relevant Resolutions: - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#20<http://icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#20> - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.2<http://icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.2> - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-28oct10-en.htm<http://icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-28oct10-en.htm> - http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201004 Information about the New gTLD Program: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm<http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm> Archive regarding the WG activities: - *E-mail:* http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-irtp-b-jun09/ - *Wiki:* https://st.icann.org/so-ac-new-gtld-wg/index.cgi

3 4

A few more changes to the 18 Nov Council meeting agenda
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 12, 2010

Nov. 12, 2010

<<Agenda GNSO Council 18 November 2010 v4.docx>> Glen reminded me that I forgot to allow time for questions of the two chair candidates and helped me find a couple places where we might be able to pick up some minutes. The latest changes are highlighted in the attached document. Chuck

2 1

Is the new TLD program delayed already?
by Adrian Kinderis Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Chuck, Forget the rhetoric but is there any truth to the core point that is raised (given the timelines?). Perhaps we can direct a question to staff? Adrian Kinderis Is the new TLD program already delayed?<http://domainincite.com/is-the-new-tld-program-already-delayed/> Kevin Murphy<http://domainincite.com/about>, November 10, 2010, 12:34:15 (UTC), Domain Registries<http://domainincite.com/category/domain-registries/> ICANN has missed the first target date on its recently approved new top-level domains launch timetable. The organization was due to publish its proposed final Applicant Guidebook for public comment yesterday, but has failed to do so. Rumor<http://twitter.com/#%21/jintlaw/status/2202733633343488> has it that it could be tomorrow or Friday before the AGB is published. Could there be a knock-on effect? Does this mean that the process as a whole, scheduled to see the first round of new TLD applications open May 30, 2011, is already delayed? Be warned, I'm just thinking aloud here. This is pure, idle speculation. Two thoughts occur to me. First, does this delay mean that ICANN will not be able to vote on the AGB at its December 10 meeting, as planned? Second, does this delay create a scenario in which the program's opponents will be able to lobby for further delays? The original, quite tight timetable<http://icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/new-gtld-work-plan-28oct10-en.pdf> called for a November 9 AGB publication date and the immediate launch of a 30-day public comment period. Doors would have closed to feedback on December 9, the day before the next ICANN board meeting. With the AGB publication deadline now missed, and if ICANN otherwise sticks to its plan, a 30-day comment window would still be open when the board convenes in Cartagena. Since ICANN is not in the habit of voting on issues that are still subject to open comment periods, my guess is that its best bet now will be to tighten the schedule. While the board has seemingly okayed 30 days for community input, I'm not sure how binding that is, and my reading of ICANN's bylaws suggests that it could be quite easily be reduced to anything as short as 21 days. A comment period that lasted beyond December 10 would enable an organization opposed to the new TLD program to submit comments after the vote has been cast, allowing no time for the board to consider them. This seemingly counter-intuitive move would however create grounds for a subsequent Reconsideration Request if the AGB is approved in Colombia, potentially delaying the process. Would this be a clever strategy? I doubt it. Reconsideration Requests rarely work, and are hardly the most effective way to have your views heard within ICANN. Still, these are strange times, and anything seems possible<http://domainincite.com/icann-drops-the-bomb-%e2%80%93-registries-can-buy-r…>. One thing is certain, given the enthusiastic reception the recent publication of the timetable<http://domainincite.com/new-tld-applications-to-open-may-2011/> received, it will be dispiriting to many today to see that ICANN has already missed its first deliverable date.

2 1

RE: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition
by Gomes, Chuck Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Note the following paragraphs from the RySG charter: "A Registry that is owned or controlled by, or under common ownership with, or affiliated with any entity that votes in another stakeholder group in either house of the GNSO is not eligible for membership in the RySG. Any question regarding eligibility or exceptions shall be determined by a vote of the RySG. The RySG will provide for observer status for entities that may not be eligible for full membership because of the preceding paragraph, and for entities that have applied, or indicated an intention to apply, for a contract with ICANN to provide gTLD registry services in support of one or more gTLDs." Chuck From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 12:18 AM To: Adrian Kinderis; owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org; Alan Greenberg; Gomes, Chuck; GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition Me too. But they'd better hurry. Mike Rodenbaugh Rodenbaugh Law ________________________________ From: Adrian Kinderis <adrian(a)ausregistry.com.au> Sender: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:33:16 +1100 To: Alan Greenberg<alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca>; Gomes, Chuck<cgomes(a)verisign.com>; Council GNSO<council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition Nope. I'll just try and wait for someone to stop me. Adrian Kinderis From: alan.greenberg(a)sympatico.ca [mailto:alan.greenberg@sympatico.ca] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 2:15 PM To: Adrian Kinderis; Gomes, Chuck; Council GNSO Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition Can you point to where the Bylaws (or anything else) say that? Alan At 10/11/2010 08:53 PM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: Right. So you can be a member of each. Just not a voting member. Adrian Kinderis From: Gomes, Chuck [ mailto:cgomes@verisign.com <mailto:cgomes@verisign.com> ] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:47 AM To: Alan Greenberg; Adrian Kinderis; Council GNSO Subject: RE: (SCL > 6): [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition I believe the revised Bylaws GNSO provisions require that someone may not vote in more than one SG or Constituency. Chuck From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [ mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> ] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:42 PM To: Adrian Kinderis; Council GNSO Subject: Re: (SCL > 6): [council] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition The old Bylaws said that an organization could be a member of more than one Constituency. I would have sworn that the new Bylaws explicitly said that you could not participate in multiple SG and had to choose, but I cannot find that clause there. Is there a rule in either SG charter about multiple memberships?? Alan At 10/11/2010 02:18 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote: Wow! http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm So what happens to the Contracted Party house? Did they think of that? ;) Adrian Kinderis

2 2

FW: Olga´s Candidate Statement
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Forwarded From: Olga Cavalli [mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com] The statement will be posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/elections/index.html Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

first results of Russian IDN .РФ open registration
by Andrei Kolesnikov Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Dear colleagues! Great news regarding the open registration for Russian IDN .РФ During the first hour we've got 36607 new domains registered. During the second hour we've got 43054 and during the 3rd hour we've got 41456 new registrations easily passing the benchmark of 100.000 new domains. Before the start we've got 18000+ domains registered during priority registration for trade mark owners. This clearly demonstrates a great demand for domains in national languages and proves Russia's position as a leader in terms of the dynamic of TLD launch. Due credit should go to the international community and their approach to extending the name space. --andrei Andrei Kolesnikov, Director Coordination center for top level domain .RU http://cctld.ru http://кц.рф

3 2

Non-Contracted Parties House Nomination for Chair X
by Rafik Dammak Nov. 11, 2010

Nov. 11, 2010

Hello, I am glad to send this email on behalf of non-contracted parties house to nominate Olga Cavalli for Council Chair. Regards Rafik Twitter: @rafik Linkedin: http://tn.linkedin.com/in/rafikdammak

4 6