April 2012 - council - lists.icann.org

Status of RAA-Drafting Team Amendment Topics in RAA Negotiations
by Margie Milam April 13, 2012

April 13, 2012

Dear All, As discussed on today's GNSO Council call, please find attached for your review a Summary Report that identifies each of the RAA-DT's high and medium priority amendment topics, and describes how they were addressed in the RAA Negotiations Progress Report that was published prior to the Costa Rica Meeting (also attached). As I indicated today, this document reflects the state of negotiations as of 1 March, 2012, but has not been updated to reflect developments since Costa Rica. Preparation of any such update would involve additional efforts on the part of the ICANN & Registrar negotiation teams to agree upon the contents of the update, and would inevitably divert attention from the negotiations themselves. Best Regards, Margie ____________ Margie Milam Senior Policy Counselor ICANN ____________

2 1

SSR Review Team - Public comment period
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

On behalf of Alice Jansen : Dear Glen, As you may know, the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR RT) is currently seeking comment on its draft report and recommendations - http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/ssrt-draft-report-15mar12-en.htm<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-15mar12-en.htm> This is to inform you that the Review Team recently extended its public comment period. The revised deadlines are enclosed for your convenience: * Comment close: 15 April 2012 * Reply close: 7 May 2012 The SSR Review Team welcomes submissions of comments and input during the reply comment period. The ICANN Community is invited to submit feedback by 7 May 2012. We would be very grateful if you could please notify the GNSO of these new deadlines and extend the SSR Review's invitation to submit feedback by the end of the reply comment period. Note that translations of the report are also available. Many thanks in advance Kind regards Olof and Alice -- Alice Jansen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

GNSO Council meeting links 12 April 2012
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

Dear Councillors, Ahead of the Council minutes, this is to let you know that the Council attendance can be found at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Council+Meetin… The meeting and Adobe chat transcript and MP3 recording are posted on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar#apr Transcript : http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/transcript-council-12apr12-en.pdf Chat Transcript : http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/chat-transcript-gnso-council-12apr12-en.pdf Council mp3 recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120412-en.mp3 The Council resolutions are posted on page : http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions#201204 Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

REVISED motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

Dear All, Apologies, below is the correct amended motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process that the Council voted on and which carried unanimously by voice vote. Motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process Whereas the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201109) Whereas a Preliminary Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was prepared by staff and posted on 21 November 2011 for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-21nov11-en.htm) Whereas a Final Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was published on 2 February 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf) Whereas the Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a Policy Development Process limited to consideration of the issues discussed in this report, and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the topic is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO; Whereas the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process at its meeting of 14 March 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20120314-1) Whereas at its wrap up session on 15 March, taking into account the current workload of the GNSO community, the GNSO Council voiced support for a delay in the start of the PDP until both ICANN staff and GNSO resources are available to deal with this. THEREFORE BE IT: Resolved, the next step (creating a drafting team to develop a charter) of the 'thick' Whois PDP will be delayed until the first GNSO Council meeting after 30 November 2012. A recording of the meeting is available at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120412-en.mp3 Apologies for the confusion. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

REVISED GNSO Council resolutions 12 April 2012
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

Dear All, The GNSO Council passed the following resolutions at the meeting today, 12 April 2012. A recording of the meeting is available at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120412-en.mp3 Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen 1. Motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process Whereas the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201109) Whereas a Preliminary Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was prepared by staff and posted on 21 November 2011 for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-21nov11-en.htm) Whereas a Final Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was published on 2 February 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf) Whereas the Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a Policy Development Process limited to consideration of the issues discussed in this report, and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the topic is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO; Whereas the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process at its meeting of 14 March 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20120314-1) Whereas at its wrap up session on 15 March, also taking into account the current workload of the GNSO community, the GNSO Council voiced support for a delay in the start of the PDP until contract negotiations on the .com agreement are complete, as the results of that negotiation may determine whether a PDP on 'thick' Whois is still required. THEREFORE BE IT: Resolved, the next step (creating a drafting team to develop a charter) of the 'thick' Whois PDP will be delayed until the .com negotiations have been completed by 30 November 2012. Motion to request an Issue Report on the protection of names and acronyms of IGOs Whereas on September 7, 2007 the GNSO Council approved by supermajority vote a PDP on new gTLDs with a number of recommendations, none of which afforded special protection to specific applicants; Whereas the GNSO Council passed a resolution approving new protections for the first round of the new gTLD program as recommended by the GNSO's International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Red Cross/Red Crescent (RC) Drafting Team; Whereas this resolution indicated that further discussions were required on associated policies relating to protections for certain international organizations at the second level, if any; Whereas comments have been received coincident with the motion that included requests from international governmental organizations requesting the same protective rights as those for the IOC/RCRC for the current and future rounds of the new gTLD program; And whereas various possible criteria for the grant of protective rights to such organizations was suggested at the ICANN meeting in Costa Rica. Now therefore be it resolved, The GNSO Council requests an issue report to precede the possibility of a PDP that covers the following issues: - Definition of the type of organizations that should receive special protection at the top and second level, if any; and - Policies required to protect such organizations at the top and second level. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Council resolutions 12 April 2012
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

Dear All, The GNSO Council passed the following resolutions at the meeting today, 12 April 2012. A recording of the meeting is available at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120412-en.mp3 Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen 1. Motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process Whereas the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201109) Whereas a Preliminary Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was prepared by staff and posted on 21 November 2011 for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-21nov11-en.htm) Whereas a Final Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was published on 2 February 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf) Whereas the Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a Policy Development Process limited to consideration of the issues discussed in this report, and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the topic is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO; Whereas the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process at its meeting of 14 March 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20120314-1) Whereas at its wrap up session on 15 March, also taking into account the current workload of the GNSO community, the GNSO Council voiced support for a delay in the start of the PDP until contract negotiations on the .com agreement are complete, as the results of that negotiation may determine whether a PDP on 'thick' Whois is still required. THEREFORE BE IT: Resolved, the next step (creating a drafting team to develop a charter) of the 'thick' Whois PDP will be delayed until the .com negotiations have been completed by 30 November 2012. Motion to delay the 'thick' Whois Policy Development Process Whereas the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on 'thick' Whois at its meeting on 22 September 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201109) Whereas a Preliminary Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was prepared by staff and posted on 21 November 2011 for public comment (see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-21nov11-en.htm) Whereas a Final Issue Report on 'thick' Whois was published on 2 February 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/final-report-thick-whois-02feb12-en.pdf) Whereas the Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a Policy Development Process limited to consideration of the issues discussed in this report, and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the topic is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO; Whereas the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process at its meeting of 14 March 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20120314-1) Whereas at its wrap up session on 15 March, taking into account the current workload of the GNSO community, the GNSO Council voiced support for a delay in the start of the PDP until both ICANN staff and GNSO resources are available to deal with this. THEREFORE BE IT: Resolved, the next step (creating a drafting team to develop a charter) of the 'thick' Whois PDP will be delayed until the first GNSO Council meeting after 30 November 2012. Motion to request an Issue Report on the protection of names and acronyms of IGOs Whereas on September 7, 2007 the GNSO Council approved by supermajority vote a PDP on new gTLDs with a number of recommendations, none of which afforded special protection to specific applicants; Whereas the GNSO Council passed a resolution approving new protections for the first round of the new gTLD program as recommended by the GNSO's International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Red Cross/Red Crescent (RC) Drafting Team; Whereas this resolution indicated that further discussions were required on associated policies relating to protections for certain international organizations at the second level, if any; Whereas comments have been received coincident with the motion that included requests from international governmental organizations requesting the same protective rights as those for the IOC/RCRC for the current and future rounds of the new gTLD program; And whereas various possible criteria for the grant of protective rights to such organizations was suggested at the ICANN meeting in Costa Rica. Now therefore be it resolved, The GNSO Council requests an issue report to precede the possibility of a PDP that covers the following issues: - Definition of the type of organizations that should receive special protection at the top and second level, if any; and - Policies required to protect such organizations at the top and second level. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#91]
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

FYI Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : jeudi 12 avril 2012 16:21 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#91] Name of Officer: * Konstantinos Komaitis Officer Email Address: * k.komaitis(a)strath.ac.uk<mailto:k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk> Date Prepared: * Thursday, April 12, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCUC Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Wolfgang Kleinwächter is unable to attend the monthly meeting Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * voting Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Thursday, April 12, 2012 I affirm that a voting position has been established on the matter(s) at issue pursuant to provisions contained in our Charter or Bylaws. * Yes Our GNSO Councilor has been instructed on how to vote on the matter(s). * Yes Please identify the GNSO Councilor who will serve as the voting proxy: * William Drake

1 0

TAS Temporarily Offline
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-12apr12-en.htm TAS Temporarily Offline 12 April 2012 ICANN constantly monitors the performance of the TLD Application System (TAS). Recently, we received a report of unusual behavior with the operation of the TAS system. We then identified a technical issue with the TAS system software. ICANN is taking the most conservative approach possible to protect all applicants and allow adequate time to resolve the issue. Therefore, TAS will be shut down until Tuesday at 23:59 UTC - unless otherwise notified before that time. In order to ensure all applicants have sufficient time to complete their applications during the disruption, the application window will remain open until 23:59 UTC on Friday, 20 April 2012. We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused. If you have any questions, please contact the gTLD Customer Service Center (CSC) via the CSC portal. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

IGO motion. how would this motion impact WGs work in cooperation with GAC?
by Zahid Jamil April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

How this motion would affect the WG we serve on. The BC would not want to support a motion that stops progress of a WG that is cooperating with the GAC Best regards, Zahid Jamil Barrister-at-law Jamil & Jamil Barristers-at-law 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan Cell: +923008238230 Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025 Fax: +92 21 5655026 www.jamilandjamil.com Notice / Disclaimer This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited. Sent from my iPad

1 0

TR: updated motion (Item 2 today)
by Glen de Saint Géry April 12, 2012

April 12, 2012

Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org De : Mary.Wong(a)law.unh.edu [mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu] Envoyé : jeudi 12 avril 2012 13:34 À : Glen de Saint Géry Objet : Fwd: updated motion (Item 2 today) Importance : Haute Glen, can u forward to whoever uploads info to Adobe? This is the updated motion Thomas Rickert and I have agreed to for Item 2. Thank you!!!!! Mary W S Wong Professor of Law Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP Chair, Graduate IP Programs UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH 03301USAEmail: mary.wong(a)law.unh.eduPhone<mailto:mary.wong@law.unh.eduPhone>: 1-603-513-5143Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584 As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname(a)law.unh.edu<mailto:firstname.lastname@law.unh.edu>. For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law, please visit law.unh.edu >>>

1 0