September 2012 - council - lists.icann.org

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#98]
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 12, 2012

Sept. 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 From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 12 septembre 2012 21:45 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#98] Name of Officer: * Robin Gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, September 12, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Mary Wong is unable to attend the GNSO Council Meeting on 13 September 2012. Joy Liddicoat will hold Mary's proxy for the meeting. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * all 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] * Friday, September 14, 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: * Joy Liddicoat

1 0

Impact of new gTLDs - draft letter
by Thomas Rickert Sept. 12, 2012

Sept. 12, 2012

All, in preparation of this week's GNSO telco, please find below the draft letter in response to Bertrand de La Chapelle's request for input on the impact of new gTLDs. I would like to thank Brian Winterfeldt, Joy Liddicoat, Osvaldo Novao, Zahid Jamil, Stéphane van Gelder, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben and Jeff Neuman for their contributions. I am looking forward to discussing this with you. Best regards, Thomas Dear Bertrand, the GNSO Council would like to thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback to your request for input on the impact of new gTLDs on ICANN's structure. As you know, the Council as well as individual SGs and Constituencies have been discussing this important subject for a long time now. It has also been a topic during face to face meetings between the GNSO Council and the Board and GAC as well as with the ccNSO. Some groups have already or will respond to the Board directly and our impression is that they are confident to have taken appropriate steps to address the upcoming challenges. As far as the Council is concerned, here will most likely be quantitative and qualitative challenges. What these will be and their size can hardly be predicted. In qualitative terms, there may be new requests to form constituencies and new stakeholder groups in both houses, some of which may be re-configurations or alignments of existing groups. Since this is an unknown factor, the effects on the democratic and participatory process of the Council and the response to that are yet to be seen. However, we would like to highlight that ICANN is already publishing information on how to participate (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/about/participation.htm) including information on how to form a Constituency. Thus, the information and processes are available to be inclusive. In quantitative terms, challenges are more predictable in some aspects. For sure, there will be - more attention by the general pubic and Governments; - more attendants at meetings, which has an impact on sizing the venues; - more groups that need administrative and technical support; - more telephone conferences with more participants and more remote participation; - more documents to be produced and read; - more decisions to be made and operationalized; - more contractors that need to be managed; - an increased budget to be administered; - more compliance issues that need to be taken care of; to name but a few areas of growth. While ICANN should have sufficient funds to meet these challenges, growth needs to be managed carefully. More staff and other operational resources will be needed to support the community and fulfill ICANN's mission while preserving operational excellence. These quantitative challenges require managerial responses that ICANN can prepare for. Such preparations should also encompass the increased burden on volunteers to deal with even more and potentially more complex material to work on. Processes and support schemes for volunteers should be designed to best possibly avoid volunteer fatigue. The unknown is what new groups will be established and what their place and role in the ICANN eco system shall be. However, additions will only lead to marginal changes that can be dealt with once they are known. In summary, the GNSO Council believes that the current structure is resilient to respond to the challenges to come as long as ICANN provides the resources required to accommodate an increasing number of participants / stakeholders and their respective needs. Thank you, Stéphane van Gelder GNSO Chair

3 3

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#97]
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 12, 2012

Sept. 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 From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 12 septembre 2012 01:03 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#97] Name of Officer: * Steve DelBianco Officer Email Address: * sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org <mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org%20> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, September 11, 2012 GNSO Organization: * Business Constituency Officer Position or Title: * vice chair for policy coordination Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Councilor Zahid Jamil will be participating in a Pakistani government proceeding during the Council meeting on 13-Sep-2012 Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Voting on any business that comes before Council on 13-Sep-2012 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] * Friday, September 14, 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: * John Berard

1 0

Fake renewal notices
by Mason Cole Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

Councilors -- You recall we discussed the issue of fake renewal notices in our July meeting and deliberated possible ways to address the problem. I volunteered to discuss this with the RrSG and return to the council with the registrars' thoughts before deciding how to proceed. Forgive the length of this email, but I want to be sure all the issues are on the table. As is often the case, regrettably, a seemingly simple issue is not so simple as you peel back the layers. Also, registrars must take care in discussions about competitive activity and particular competitors so as not to violate antitrust protections. The problem Certain providers send what appear to be renewal notices but are in fact disguised requests to transfer a name from one registrar to another. Unsuspecting customers of ours who don't carefully read the communication wind up moving their names from the original registrar to the one sending the communication. Customers must then deal with a new entity they likely didn't consciously choose. Working group options As Mikey O'Connor and his WG informed us in Costa Rica, the WG looked at a number of options for addressing the issue. This included launching a full PDP, attaching the issue to an existing PDP, crafting an amendment to the RAA, and reporting the offending entities to authorities in relevant jurisdictions. History There's a link in the DT's report to the council describing activity various authorities have undertaken to address the practice, particularly in the US and Canada. I recommend review of this section to understand what's happened to this point. This includes action from governments and the courts. Why does the problem yet persist? As one of our members put it, every time there's a legal ruling, some of the craftiest attorneys around carefully write language in the renewal notices that work around new legal requirements. It may also be the case that regulatory authorities are not aware of the ongoing violations, or that they don’t have effective jurisdiction over the perpetrators. PDP issue The registrars recognize the attractiveness of addressing the situation via PDP (it's perceived as an "easy" issue that could be acted on quickly to demonstrate council responsiveness and agility). However, we should proceed with care for the following reasons: 1. Drafting policy language that limits certain activity could inadvertently restrain marketing efforts (unattractive and deceptive as they may be in this instance -- and be clear, the RrSG is not defending it). As has been repeatedly pointed out, the registrar marketplace is very competitive and almost all of us work in good faith to attract business in various ways. ICANN cannot make judgment calls on what is good and bad "copy," so prohibiting or proscribing certain language very easily spills into regulation of speech. The council is not a regulator of speech, and this is a very slippery slope. 2. It doesn't in fact appear to be an "easy" issue that could be quickly resolved, unfortunately. The RrSG is mindful of the politics of the situation; however, while politics may be important, more important is making sure efforts are effective. If they are not effective, the politics will be worse later, and we'll still have the problem behavior. Effective, in this context, means something compliance could enforce with its limited budget and manpower. Issues with the RAA There have beens suggestions to just write a line or two into the RAA to prohibit this activity. The RrSG's observation is that if legal language meant to prohibit activity were so easy, the problem would have been cleared up long ago, by contracts, courts and/or consumer protection agencies. Addressing the behavior through the RAA may eventually be useful. Again, however, language must be effective -- if authorities in Canada and the US, with court rulings behind them, are still unable to find enforceable language to use, that's a signal that ICANN would need to take extreme care in attempting the same so the offender's lawyers don't continue to "write around" the issue. Next steps The RrSG is interested in finding the most effective way to handle this issue, which harms consumers and law abiding registrars. While it deplores this type of behavior, the RrSG believes that we should be cautious about putting ICANN in the role of law enforcement via the registry and registrar agreements, particularly when evidence suggests that enforcement is tricky. In particular, creating a contractual obligation that is difficult for ICANN to enforce will only subject ICANN to more criticism about its compliance program without actually changing the behavior. From here, we recommend the following steps: 1. Discuss the issue with ICANN Compliance to make SG and GNSO concerns known, as previous legal actions may impact renewal of offenders' accreditation agreements. 2. Communicate to jurisdictional authorities as a SG to make our concerns known and to assess renewed enforcement – especially authorities like the FTC and the Canadian consumer agency that have already brought cases and may have stronger enforcement tools (e.g., civil penalties for violations of settlement agreements, etc.) that can be used. In particular, it may make sense to schedule a discussion with interested consumer protection authorities in Toronto. 3. Report findings to the GNSO Council. 4. Investigate whether or not enforceable contract language can be crafted, and the extent to which it could be equally or more effective than enforcement actions to date. For example, rather than requiring ICANN to make a determination about the behavior, a contractual provision that says accreditation can be revoked where a registrar has been found to be in violation of a court order or regulatory cease and desist order. The registrars would welcome the renewal notice WG's ongoing participation in these efforts, of course. I look forward to the discussion of this matter on our call Thursday. Mason

2 1

Re: ALAC Statement on the Consumer Metrics Working Group Final Advice
by Stéphane Van Gelder Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

Councillors, With my thanks to Olivier and Alac, please find attached Alac's statement. Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM NetNames France ---------------- Registry Relations and Strategy Director NetNames T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51 F: +22 (0)1 48 01 83 61 Le 10 sept. 2012 à 22:23, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond a écrit : > > Dear Stéphane, > > I have the honor of transmitting to you, on behalf of the At-Large > Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Statement of the ALAC on the Consumer > Metrics Working Group Final Advice. > > Please be so kind to find the statement attached, the contents of > which I kindly ask you to relay to the GNSO Council when the > subject comes up on its 13 September 2012 conference call. > > An online vote resulted in the ALAC endorsing the Statement with > 12 votes in favor, 0 votes against, and 1 abstention. > > In line with prior ALAC advice extrinsicus the usual Public Comment > process, my colleagues and I should appreciate a response from the > GNSO council when the matter has been discussed and a decision taken > on the next steps the council will take. > > Kind regards, > > Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond > ALAC Chair > > <ALAC Statement on the Consumer Metrics Final Advice.pdf>

1 0

Updated GNSO Council Meeting Agenda / 13 September 2012 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

Dear All, Please find the updated Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 13 September 2012 at 15:00 UTC is posted on page http://gnso.icann.org/en/calendar#sep http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-13sep12-en.htm and on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+13+September… Two items have been added to the agenda: · Item 2: Motion to adopt the revised GNSO Operating Procedures incorporating a consent agenda provision and updated voting results table and to adopt a technical change in proxy notification (5 minutes) Council motion for Item 2: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+13+Septembe… · Item11: Consumer Metrics Advice Letter to the ICANN Board (10 minutes) Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 13 September 2012 This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 22 September 2011 for the GNSO Council and updated. http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-16dec11-en.pdf For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. Meeting Times 15:00 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx Coordinated Universal Time 15:00 UTC 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 16:00 London; 17:00 Paris; 00:00 Tokyo. Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audiocast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates 1.3 Review/amend agenda 1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 20 July 2012<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-20jul12-en.htm> approved on 22 August 2012. 1.5. GNSO Pending Projects List http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf * Review main changes. * Comments and/or questions. Item 2: Motion to adopt the revised GNSO Operating Procedures incorporating a consent agenda provision and updated voting results table and to adopt a technical change in proxy notification (5 minutes) Following the Council's request, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) has worked on a process for formalising the consent agenda, updated the voting results table and reviewed the current procedures for proxy voting. These are now being presented for Council approval. 2.1 Update<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/rap/comments-rap-uniformity-of-reporting-30…> from SCI Chair (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 2.2 Discussion. 2.3 Vote. Item 3: Consent agenda (5 minutes) A consent agenda item is being added as a standard agenda item to provide for a simplified process to obtain Council approval on specific tasks. 3.1 Approve proposed IRD-WG letter from GNSO Council to ICANN Board<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/van-gelder-faltstrom-to-icann-board…>. Item 4: RAP recommendation on Uniformity of Reporting 10 minutes) At its meeting on 6 October, the GNSO Council requested the ICANN Compliance Department to report on existing systems to report and track violations and/or complaints; improvements made since the RAPWG Report or foreseen in the near future, and: indentify gaps and any improvements that might be desirable but not foreseen at this stage. The ICANN Compliance Team submitted its report on 18 March and presented it to the GNSO Council at its meeting on 12 April. Refer to the report http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/contractual-compliance-report-reporting-un… The Council must now decide what next steps to take, if any. 4.1 Update<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/rap/comments-rap-uniformity-of-reporting-30…> from Mikey O'Connor. 4.2 Discussion. 4.3 Nest steps. Item 5: Whois Review Team Final Report (10 minutes) At its July 20, 2012 meeting, the Council created a small group to draft a letter in response to ICANN Board resolved #2012.06.23.26 (see Board resolution (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#5) The August 31, 2012 deadline set by the Board for receiving input proved too short for the Council, and on August 30, 2012 GNSO Chair Stéphane Van Gelder sent Chairman of the ICANN Board Steve Crocker and Interim ICANN CEO Akram Attalah a letter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/33821> informing them that the Council would hopefully be providing further input very soon. A draft has been proposed by the group. The Council must now decide whether to send this draft as-is or not. 5.1 Update from group (Brian Winterfeldt) 5. 2 Discussion 5. 3 Next steps. Item 6: Fake Renewal Notices (10 minutes) The GNSO Council requested that a small group prepare a request for information concerning Fake Renewal Notices for the Registrar Stakeholder Group to help inform its deliberations on the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAP WG) Recommendation on Fake Renewal Notices (#2). Once the drafting team submitted its report to the GNSO Council and the comment period was completed, the GNSO Council requested the Drafting Team to review the comments received, update the report if deemed appropriate and report back accordingly. The DT has reviewed the comments received and submitted its updated report to the GNSO Council on 21 June 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/frn/fake-renewal-notices-updated-report-20jun1…) and the DT Chair presented this report to the Council at the July 20 meeting. At that meeting, the Council opted to have further consultations with the Registrar Stakeholder Group to find out what solutions the Registrars can offer to deal with bad actors and return to the Council with proposals for options, or solutions, or next steps on this issue. This agenda item is an update on those consultations. 6.1 Update from RrSG (Mason Cole) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps Item 7: Final Issue Report on Protection of International Organizations (10 minutes) The Preliminary Issue Report on the protection of international organization names requested by the GNSO Council on 12 April was published and a public comment forum was opened on 4 June. http://gnso.icann.org/issues/intl-org-names-prelim-issue-report-04jun12-en.… The GNSO Drafting Team is evaluating possible recommendations to protect the Red Cross and IOC names at the second level and staff has now published the Final Issue Report, since the Public Comment forum has closed. This item is an overview of that report and an examination of possible next steps. 7.1 Update from Staff (Brian Peck) 7.2 Discussion 7.3 Next steps Item 8: Impact of new gTLDs on ICANN's structure (10 minutes) The new gTLD program will have a significant impact on the functioning of ICANN and its structure. The Board has called for an in-depth community discussion to identify early the corresponding challenges and possible evolutions. A call has been put out for the community to share a one-pager on this topic to gather preliminary views and help prepare a dedicated session in Toronto. The GNSO Council has expressed a desire to respond to this call and a small group has been created to draft a response. Although the Board has called for a response by September 10, this is not a hard deadline so the Council will now consider whether to approve the proposed response. 8.1 Update on draft response (Thomas Rickert) 8.2 Discussion 8.3 Call to approve sending response to the Board Item 9: Overview of schedule for Toronto (10 minutes) As usual, work is ongoing on preparing the GNSO's work schedule for the upcoming ICANN international meeting. This includes the GNSO's weekend working sessions and Wednesday's Open Council Meeting. 9.1 Update on Toronto agenda (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 9.2 Discussion and review of any amendments to agenda Item 10: Toronto GAC High Level Meeting (15 minutes) The GAC is organizing a High Level Meeting on October 15 in Toronto. The agenda for this meeting includes an exchange with SO/AC leadership. Following a clarification request by the GNSO leadership, the GAC leadership has given the following explanation on its expectations for the meeting: "I would recommend preparation of Qs and lining up speakers in advance. I trust that the GNSO leadership will work with the GAC, as well as my Canadian colleagues, to find a balance between the differing cultures of the GNSO, and senior officials and politicians unfamiliar with the ICANN environment, to have a positive and productive exchange to reinforce and improve the multi-stakeholder model." The Council should therefore plan for this meeting and discuss possible questions it may want to raise. 10.1 Introduction and overview of meeting (Stéphane Van Gelder) 10.2 Discussion Item11: Consumer Metrics Advice Letter to the ICANN Board (10 minutes) The advice letter was drafted in response to an ICANN Board resolution asking for definitions and metrics that will be used to evaluate the gTLD expansion program in a post-launch review required under the Affirmation of Commitments<http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm>[1]. Since the AOC did not define the terms or measures of competition, consumer trust and consumer choice, the ICANN Board resolved in December 2010 (ICANN Board resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-10dec10-en.htm#6>) to request advice from the ALAC, GAC, GNSO and ccNSO on establishing the definition, measures, and three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer choice. After nearly a year of WG deliberation, public sessions or updates at the Dakar, Costa Rica, and Prague meetings, and a review of public comments submitted by the community, the Consumer Metric WG submitted its final version of the Advice Letter to the GNSO Council on 17 August 2012 for its consideration. Upon the GNSO Council’s deliberation and acceptance, the Advice Letter will be sent to the ICANN Board for their consideration. 11.1 Update from John Berard (WG Liaison) and Berry Cobb (Staff). 11.2 Discussion. 11.3 Next steps. Item 12: Management of work (10 minutes) Recent discussions on the Council list have raised concerns about the volume of documents published prior to an ICANN meeting and how these can best be managed by the volunteer community that makes up the GNSO Council as it struggles to read a substantial amount of reports and other documents in order to better inform its own decision making processes with regards to policy. 12.1 Discussion Item 13: Any Other Business (5 minutes) Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A<http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA>): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation. i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded. k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House." Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting‟s adjournment. In exceptional circumstances,announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 15:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+1DST 08:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 11:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+1DST 16:00 Abuja,Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Tunis, Tunisia (CET) UTC+1+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+1DST 17:00 Paris, France (CEST) UTC+1+1DST 17:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 18:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 20:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 23:00 Tokyo, Japan (JST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/jst.html>) UTC+9+0DST 00:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+0DST 03:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2012, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com and http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org ________________________________ [1] Affirmation of Commitments: http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm

1 0

Pre-Toronto ICANN Policy Update Webinar Invitation
by Glen de Saint Géry Sept. 9, 2012

Sept. 9, 2012

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-07sep12-en.htm Pre-Toronto ICANN Policy Update Webinar Invitation 7 September 2012 In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>) to receive the call details. Whether you plan to participate in the upcoming ICANN meeting in Toronto remotely or in person, you're invited to an update on the background and current status of each major policy issue currently under discussion in ICANN. The ICANN Policy Staff will provide a briefing on Thursday 4 October at 12.00 UTC and Thursday 4 October at 19.00 UTC, summarizing policy issues across the different ICANN Supporting Organizations, namely the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) and Address Supporting Organization (ASO). Amongst other topics, updates will be provided on: * Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy * WHOIS * RAA Improvements * Protection of International Organization Names * Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation * Study Group on Use of Names for Countries and Territories * Framework of Interpretation Working Group for the delegation and re-delegation of ccTLDs * Joint DNS Security and Stability Analysis Working Group * Participation and Engagement activities in Toronto In addition, staff will provide a briefing on the ALAC's activities related to current policy development issues of the Supporting Organizations. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for 90 minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join, Thursday at 12.00 UTC or Thursday at 19.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html) We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff members e-mail address. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: ICANN Finance Ad Hoc Session 3 - Call Schedules
by Stéphane Van Gelder Sept. 7, 2012

Sept. 7, 2012

Councillors, should you wish to attend. Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM NetNames France ---------------- Registry Relations and Strategy Director NetNames T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51 F: +22 (0)1 48 01 83 61 Début du message réexpédié : > De : "Maya S. Reynolds" <maya.reynolds(a)icann.org> > Objet : ICANN Finance Ad Hoc Session 3 - Call Schedules > Date : 7 septembre 2012 03:25:06 HAEC > À : Charles Gomes <cgomes(a)verisign.com>, "tijani.benjemaa(a)fmai.org" <tijani.benjemaa(a)fmai.org>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade(a)hotmail.com>, Chris Chaplow <chris(a)andalucia.com>, Raimundo Beca <rbeca(a)imaginaccion.cl>, Bret Fausett <bret(a)internet.pro>, 'Roelof Meijer' <roelof.meijer(a)sidn.nl>, Paul Diaz <pdiaz(a)pir.org>, Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com>, Alain Berranger <alain.berranger(a)gmail.com>, "tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com" <tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com>, Patrik Fältström <patrik(a)frobbit.se>, Steven Metalitz <met(a)msk.com> > Cc : Aba Diakite <aba.diakite(a)icann.org>, Janice Douma Lange <janice.lange(a)icann.org>, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org>, Carole Cornell <carole.cornell(a)icann.org>, Heather <Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca>, "junsec(a)wide.ad.jp" <junsec(a)wide.ad.jp>, "lesley(a)nominet.org.uk" <lesley(a)nominet.org.uk>, 'Stéphane Van Gelder' <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>, "jcurran(a)arin.net" <jcurran(a)arin.net>, Robin Gross <robin(a)ipjustice.org>, "dave(a)difference.com.au" <dave(a)difference.com.au>, "dmaher(a)pir.org" <dmaher(a)pir.org>, "matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com" <matt.serlin(a)markmonitor.com>, Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca>, 'Louie ' <louie(a)louie.net>, Larisa Gurnick <larisa.gurnick(a)icann.org> > > Dear Community leaders, > > Thank you again for your participation on ICANN Community Ad Hoc Finance Sessions. > Further to the Doodle Poll from the participants on 3 Ad Hoc teams, our third call sessions have been scheduled as follows: > > Budget Process Strategic Planning Ad Hoc Sessions / Tuesday, September 18 at 6:00am (PDT), 9:00am (EDT), 1:00pm (UTC) > Other Time Zone - http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Budget+Process+Str… > Budget Document Structure and Content Ad Hoc Sessions / Tuesday, September 18 at 8:00am (PDT), 11:00am (EDT), 3:00pm (UTC) > Other Time Zone - http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Budget+Document+St… > Budget Process Community Timeline Ad Hoc Sessions / Wednesday, September 19 at 8:00am (PDT), 11:00am (EDT), 3:00pm (UTC) > Other Time Zone - http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Budget+Process+Com… > > Please go to https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Finance+Ad+Hoc+Community… to review our previous discussions and notes as well as the Conference Call information and Adobe Connect information. > Calendar invitations will go out shortly, if you require a dial-out please contact Maya at: maya.reynolds(a)icann.org as well as your preferred contact number. > Thank you. > > Best regards, > > Maya Saito Reynolds > Executive Assistant to Xavier Calvez, CFO > ICANN > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 > 310-301-5833 Office > 310-339-3787 Cell > > > > > >

1 0

new gTLD Program update slide deck
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 6, 2012

Sept. 6, 2012

From: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/webinars Attached is the slide deck for the new gTLD update webinar that is scheduled to start in 4 hours. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

new gTLD update
by Bruce Tonkin Sept. 6, 2012

Sept. 6, 2012

From: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/webinars Attached is a new gTLD Program Update. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0