October 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

Personal Thoughts on String Similarity
by Neuman, Jeff Oct. 8, 2013

Oct. 8, 2013

All, In preparation for our Council call this week where the topic of String Similarity will be discussed, I wanted to provide these comments which are my own and not necessarily the views of the Registries Stakeholder Group. Like many in the ICANN community, I have expressed some frustration about inconsistent application of ICANN's standard for new gTLD objections based on claims that an applied for string is "confusingly similar" to another proposed gTLD or to an existing TLD. This led me to ask Christine Willett during the last ICANN Webinar Update how the ICANN staff intended to proceed in such cases. I want to be clear, however, that "consistent" application of the confusingly similar standard DOES NOT require the "same" outcome for all applications for the exact match for a particular string. If that were the case, then the dispute resolution panels would be required to evaluate the likelihood of confusion without regard to each applicant's unique plan for a gTLD string and their arguments articulating why such plans would not cause confusion. That would be a huge mistake. In fact, the proposed use of a new gTLD is highly relevant to the question of whether or not there is a likelihood of confusion. Indeed, it is to be expected that expert panels might reasonably conclude, as has apparently happened, that the string ".cam" is confusingly similar to ".com" in one case but not in another. As lawyers for United TLD argued in that case (in a publicly accessible letter), "Consolidation has the potential to prejudice the Applicants if all Applicants' arguments are evaluated collectively, without regard to each Applicant's unique plan for the .cam gTLD and their arguments why such plans would not cause confusion." In fact, the complained-of inconsistency in other cases appears to arise from the panel's failure to actually take account of the context in which a proposed gTLD would operate. Examples include translation cases where the different markets were likely not considered. My point is that the community and applicant pool each have legitimate interests in the consistent application of ICANN's standard for determining whether or not two strings "confusingly similar." Those interests do not, however, justify further delay or re-opening cases where context supports a finding of confusing similarity in one case but not another. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs 46000 Center Oak Plaza, Sterling, VA 20166 Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / jeff.neuman(a)neustar.biz<mailto:jeff.neuman@neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>

2 1

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#131]
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 7, 2013

Oct. 7, 2013

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mardi 8 octobre 2013 00:21 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#131] Name of Officer: * Robin Gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Monday, October 7, 2013 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Wolfgang Kleinwachter will be absent from the 10 October 2013 GNSO Council Meeting and Maria Farrell will serve as Wolfgang's proxy for this meeting. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Any and 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, October 11, 2013 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: * Maria Farrell

1 0

Council meeting times revised
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 4, 2013

Oct. 4, 2013

Dear Councillors, Please note the change to the times of the Council meetings going forward: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#oct 1. 5 September: 15h00 UTC 2. 10 October: 18h00 UTC 3. 31 October: 11h00 UTC - (revised from 15:00 UTC) 4. 12 December 15h00 UTC This revision has been made to rotate the times fairly. 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Agenda for new gTLD Program Committee - 4 Oct 2013
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 3, 2013

Oct. 3, 2013

Hello All, Note that the new gTLD Program Committee will be discussing Name Collision Risk Management at its meeting on Friday 4 October 2013. See: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/agenda-new-gtld-04oct13-en.h… Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0

ICANN Whois Privacy/Proxy Abuse Study Findings Webinar Invitation
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 3, 2013

Oct. 3, 2013

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27sep13-en.htm ICANN Whois Privacy/Proxy Abuse Study Findings Webinar Invitation 27 September 2013 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. You are invited to participate in a webinar about the recently released Whois Privacy/Proxy Abuse Study, conducted for ICANN by the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in the United Kingdom. This study has now been published for public comment, and community feedback is being invited in order to assist ICANN with evaluating potential changes to Whois policy and the use of privacy/proxy services. The study was commissioned by the GNSO to help the ICANN community understand the role that privacy and proxy service abuse plays in obscuring the identities of parties engaged in illegal or harmful activities, including phishing, cybersquatting, hosting child abuse sexual images, advanced fee fraud, and the online sale of counterfeit pharmaceuticals. NPL was engaged to analyze domain names across the top five gTLDs - .biz, .com, .info, .net and .org - to measure whether the percentage of privacy/proxy use among domains engaged in illegal or harmful Internet activities is significantly greater than among domain names used for lawful Internet activities. NPL's chief investigator on the study, Dr. Richard Clayton of the University of Cambridge, and ICANN staff will provide a briefing on Tuesday 15 October at 12.00 UTC and 19.00 UTC, summarizing NPL's findings and conclusions based on the data they collected and analyzed. Amongst other topics, Dr. Clayton will discuss: * NPL's methodology for the study and the hypothesis tested; * The different project activities and work packages undertaken for the study; * NPL's statistical analysis of the data sampled for the study, including comparative differences observed by the research team; and * NPL's conclusions based on the results of its analysis. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for sixty (60) 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 also 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 on Tuesday 15 October - at 12.00 UTC or 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 member's 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 10 October 2013
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 2, 2013

Oct. 2, 2013

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 10 October 2013. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13jun13-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 18:00 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/lc97zd8 Coordinated Universal Time 18:00 UTC 11:00 Los Angeles; 14:00 Washington; 19:00 London; 20:00 Paris; 07:00 Wellington next day 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 audio cast http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (10 mins) 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 1 August 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-01aug13-en.htm> posted as approved on 6 September 2013 Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 5 September 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg15019.html> to be posted as approved on 10 October 2013 Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 mins) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>. Comments or questions arising. Item 3: Consent agenda (5 mins) After careful review of the GNSO Project List, the Council Chairs propose to formally close the following projects and remove them from the Project List, noting that either work is being undertaken on the subject outside of the GNSO and/or that no further GNSO activity is foreseen in the near future. The projects are as follows: * Fake renewal notices * Defensive registrations Note: Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. Item 4: MOTION - To approve the report of the Whois Survey Working Group (WSWG) (10 mins) This report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf> was published in response to a request by the GNSO Council for a report and analysis on a survey about possible technical requirements of a future WHOIS Service. The objective of the Working Group was to develop a set of proposed recommendations around the measurement of support of proposed technical requirements. After consideration of community input on a draft survey and the implementation of the Lime Survey software within the ICANN IT infrastructure, the survey was made available to the community in September 2012. ICANN staff compiled and consolidated the survey results and the WSWG completed the WSWG Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/wswg-final-21aug13-en.pdf> for delivery to the GNSO Council. Here the Council will vote whether to approve the report. 4.1 - Review motion 1<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+Oct.+2013> 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Next steps Item 5: MOTION - Motion to approve the further development of a framework for cross community working groups (10 mins) This motion seeks further develop a framework for cross community working groups by picking up the work of the drafting team which proposed a set of Draft Principles for Cross Community Working Groups<http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/draft-principles-for-cwgs-23dec11-en.pdf> (CCWGs) that were approved<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201203> by the GNSO Council in March 2012. This work has had the benefit of subsequent review, comments and suggestions<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/ccnso-comments-cwg-principles-11jun13-en.pdf> provided by the ccNSO. The motion here proposes that, in full cooperation with other SO/ACs,the GNSO Council jointly develops an updated set of principles for CCWGs taking into consideration the feedback provided by the ccNSO and in collaboration with other interested SO/ACs. The aim being to to create a framework applicable across all SO/ACs for the effective future functioning of CCWGs 5.1 - Review motion 2<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+Oct.+2013> 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Next steps Item 6: MOTION - To approve a charter for the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group (10 mins) On 13 June 2013 the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information and decided to create a PDP Working Group for the purposes of fulfilling the requirements of the PDP. Following a call for volunteers, a Drafting Team was formed and its members have developed a charter for consideration by the GNSO Council. The drafting team has submitted the charter and so the GNSO Council, having reviewed the charter, will vote on whether to approve it as submitted by the Drafting Team. 6.1 - Review motion 3<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+Oct.+2013> 6.2 - Discussion 6.3 - Next steps Item 7: INPUT & DISCUSSION - Prospective improvements to the Policy Development Process (10 mins) The Council is committed to on-going enhancements to the methods of working of the Council and the work initiated and managed by the Council. The PDP process is a cornerstone of policy making within the GNSO and, as such, the work of the Council. The PDP outcomes and associated processes are the subject of focus and attention both within the GNSO and the broader ICANN Community. The Council has previously discussed a paper prepared by ICANN staff<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/pdp-improvements-22aug13-en.pdf> on potential improvements to the PDP process and agreed to tabulate and review the prospective improvements with a view to agreeing concrete next steps. 7.1 - Review of table of prospective PDP Improvements (Marika Konings) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - A PDP for relevant policies on issues not dealt with during the course of developing the 2013 RAA (10 mins) ICANN staff has prepared a paper<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/negotiations-conclusion-16sep13-en.pdf> to summarise the outcomes of the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) negotiations in order to set the scene for subsequent, relevant policy development work to be managed by the Council. This will be an ICANN Board initiated PDP. Here the Council will receive an update from staff and confirm the intended course of action. 8.1 Staff update (Margie Milam / Mary Wong) 8.2 Discussion 8.3 Next steps Item 9: DISCUSSION - Policy issues surrounding string confusion (10 mins) The Council previously discussed issues associated with the string confusion decisions that have been made recently e.g. relating to plural and singular versions of the same term and the contradictory decisions on identical strings. The Council agreed to write to the ICANN board and new gTLD programme committee<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/robinson-to-crocker-chalaby-18sep13…> and to consider appropriate additional action. Here the Council needs to decide what, if any, additional and appropriate action is to be taken. 9.1 Discussion 9.2 Next steps Item 10: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs Policy Development Process (10 mins) The WG Chair will provide an update on status of WG deliberations and the public comment<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/igo-ingo-final-20sep13-en.htm> solicitation process for the draft Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/igo-ingo-final-20sep13-en.pdf>. This PDP WG was formed to develop a set of policy recommendations to address the issue of whether and if so, what types of protections should be provided for the identifiers of certain IGOs and INGOs including the RCRC and IOC at the top and second levels in all gTLDs. For further information please see: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/igo-ingo. 10.1 - Review of proposed WG recommendations (Thomas Rickert) 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - GNSO / GAC Engagement and Working with the Board Global Relations Committee (BGRC) WG (10 mins) Here the Council will discuss activity to date and confirm the intended course of action going forward. 11.1 - Status update (Jonathan Robinson) 11.2 - Discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: DISCUSSION - Forthcoming review of the GNSO (10 mins) As part of a periodic review process that is built into the ICANN model, board initiated reviews of the GNSO and the GNSO Council as an integral part of the GNSO are expected. In order to be effectively prepared for these reviews, it was proposed in Beijing that a group be formed to understand the issues and begin to take appropriate next steps. One key suggestion from Beijing was that any group (such as the Council) being reviewed undertakes a form of self-review. The intended course of action may have been impacted by the recently announced proposal to delay any Board initiated review activity. Here the Council will receive an update and agree the intended course of action of initiating a non-PDP WG. 12.1 - Current status (Rob Hogarth) 12.2 - Discussion 12.3 - Next steps Item 13: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Planning for Buenos Aires (10 mins) Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires will take planning. GNSO Council Vice Chair, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben has again volunteered to lead this and will be working with the Council and staff on this effort. Here the Council has the opportunity to feed into plans and provide input based on past experience. Included in this item will be the opportunity to shape the approach to and substance of the Council's proposed meetings with other groups in such as the CCNSO, the GAC and the ICANN board. 13.1 - Update (Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 13.2 - Discussion 13.3 - Next steps Item 14: Procedure to elect the GNSO Council Chair (10 minutes) We have previously used an election procedure. Here we will review a current version of the same procedure<http://gnso.icann.org/elections/proposed-council-chair-02oct13-en.pdf> with a view to approving it for use in the run up to and during the course of the 2013 annual meeting in Buenos Aires. 14.1 Presentation of procedure (Jonathan Robinson) 14.2 Discussion 14.3 Call to approve the procedure Item 15: Any Other Business (5 mins) 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 18:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+1DST 11:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+1DST 14:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 15:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 16:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 19:00 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 19:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 20:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST20:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+2+0DST 21:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 21:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 23:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 02:00 (next day) Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 02:00 (next day) Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 07:00 (next day) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of Oct 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com - http://tinyurl.com/lc97zd8 Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Resolutions from the meeting of the new gTLD program committee - held in Los Angeles on 28 Sept 2013
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 2, 2013

Oct. 2, 2013

From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13… Approved Resolutions | Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee 28 September 2013 1. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of NGPC Meeting Minutes Resolved (2013.09.28.NG01), the Board approves the minutes of the 13 August 2013 and 10 September 2013 New gTLD Program Committee Meetings. 2. Main Agenda: a. Remaining Items from Beijing and Durban GAC Advice Whereas, the GAC met during the ICANN 46 meeting in Beijing and issued a Communiqué on 11 April 2013 ("Beijing Communiqué"). Whereas, the GAC met during the ICANN 47 meeting in Durban and issued a Communiqué on 18 July 2013 ("Durban Communiqué"). Whereas, the NGPC adopted a scorecard to respond to the GAC's advice in the Beijing Communiqué and the Durban Communiqué, which were adopted on 4 June 2013 and 10 September 2013, respectively. Whereas, the NGPC has developed another iteration of the scorecard to respond to certain remaining items of GAC advice in the Beijing Communiqué and the Durban Communiqué. Whereas, the NGPC is undertaking this action pursuant to the authority granted to it by the Board on 10 April 2012, to exercise the ICANN Board's authority for any and all issues that may arise relating to the New gTLD Program. Resolved (2013.09.28.NG02), the NGPC adopts the "Remaining Items from Beijing and Durban GAC Advice: Updates and Actions" (28 September 2013), attached as Annex 1 [PDF, 94 KB] to this Resolution, in response to remaining items of GAC advice in the Beijing Communiqué and the Durban Communiqué as presented in the scorecard. b. Name Collision Discussion No resolution taken. c. String Similarity Discussion No resolution taken. d. AOB No resolution taken.

1 0

Resolutions from the ICANN Board meeting held in Los Angeles on 28 Sept 2013
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 2, 2013

Oct. 2, 2013

Hello All, See below the resolutions from the ICANN Board meeting held on 28 Sept 2013. The key topics of interest to the GNSO were: - approval of the policy for Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings - kicking off review of GNSO in 2014 - appointment of Cheryl Langdon-Orr as the 2014 Nominating Committee Chair and Stéphane Van Gelder as the 2014 Nominating Committee Chair-Elect. - a Proposed Process for GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Charter Amendments - a Clarification Regarding the Competition, Consumer Trust and Choice Metrics for the New gTLD Program per the AoC Review Regards, Bruce Tonkin From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28sep13-en.htm Approved Board Resolutions | Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board 28 September 2013 1. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes Resolved (2013.09.28.01), the Board approves the minutes of the 17 July, 18 July and 22 August 2013 Meetings of the ICANN Board. b. Delegation of a ccTLD for Iran in Arabic script Resolved (2013.09.28.02), as part of the exercise of its responsibilities under the IANA Functions Contract, ICANN has reviewed and evaluated the request to delegate the ایران ("Iran") countrycode top-level domain to the Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences. The documentation demonstrates that the proper procedures were followed in evaluating the request. Resolved (2013.09.28.03), the Board directs that pursuant to Article III, Section 5.2 of the ICANN Bylaws, that certain portions of the rationale not appropriate for public distribution within the resolutions, preliminary report or minutes at this time due to contractual obligations, shall be withheld until public release is allowed pursuant to those contractual obligations. c. GNSO Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings PDP Recommendations Whereas, on 15 December 2011, the GNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings addressing five charter questions, set forth at https://community.icann.org/x/ma-bAQ. Whereas, the PDP followed the prescribed PDP steps as stated in the Bylaws resulting in a Final Report delivered on 5 July 2013. Whereas, the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group (WG) reached full consensus on the recommendations in relation to the issues outlined in the Charter. Whereas, the GNSO Council reviewed, and discussed the recommendations of the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings WG, and adopted the Recommendations on 1 August 2013 by a Supermajority and unanimous vote (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201308) Whereas, the GNSO Council vote met and exceeded the required voting threshold to impose new obligations on ICANN contracted parties. Whereas, after the GNSO Council vote, a public comment period was held on the approved recommendations, and the comment received has been summarized and considered (http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-recommendat…) Resolved (2013.09.28.04), the Board adopts the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings as set forth in the Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/locking/domain-name-final-05jul13-en.pdf [PDF, 1.01 MB]). Resolved (2013.09.28.05), the President and CEO is directed to develop and complete an implementation plan for these Recommendations and continue communication with the community on such work. d. Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Review Implementation Whereas, on 21 April 2011, the Board resolved to direct ICANN staff, in coordination with the Structural Improvements Committee (SIC), to develop a proposed implementation plan and timeline for the recommendations in the Final Report of the ccNSO Review Board Working Group [PDF, 294 KB] and to submit these to the Structural Improvements Committee for review and Board approval (Resolution 2011.04.21.06). Whereas, at its 18 June 2011 meeting, the SIC acknowledged receipt from staff of an implementation plan, titled "ccNSO Improvements Implementation Project Plan", dated 9 June 2011, and resolved to recommend it to the ICANN Board for approval. Whereas, at its 24 June 2011 meeting, the Board resolved to request that ICANN CEO direct staff to proceed with the implementation in accordance with the implementation plan document ccNSO Improvements Implementation Project Plan dated 9 June 2011 [PDF, 508 KB] (Resolution 2011.06.24.03). Whereas, on 27 September 2013, the SIC acknowledged receipt of a letter from the ccNSO Chair announcing completion of the ccNSO review implementation in complement of a final ccNSO implementation Project Plan update, dated September 2013. Whereas, on 27 September 2013, the SIC agreed to recommend that the ICANN Board receive the final ccNSO implementation Project Plan update [PDF, 170 KB], dated September 2013, note the implementation phase of the ccNSO review as complete, and commence the assessment phase inherent in the review cycle. Resolved (2013.09.28.06), the Board receives the final ccNSO implementation Project Plan update, dated September 2013, and notes the completion of the implementation of the ccNSO review recommendations. Resolved (2013.09.28.07), the Board directs the ICANN President and CEO to assess the improvements arising out of the ccNSO review in accordance with the assessment phase of the organizational review cycle. Resolved (2013.09.28.08), the Board thanks the ccNSO for its implementation work. e. GNSO Review Whereas, under ICANN's Bylaws the next review of the GNSO was due to commence in 2013. Whereas, the SIC solicited and considered public comments on whether the review should be postponed and a new schedule for the review be established within the next six months. Whereas, it is important that the review of the GNSO take into account the outcomes of ICANN's strategic planning efforts and the Accountability and Transparency Review Team 2's work, which can only be achieved through the initiation of a GNSO review in 2014. Resolved (2013.09.28.09), that the Board directs the SIC to schedule the review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), which is mandated by ICANN Bylaws Article IV, Section 4, to commence in 2014, and that preparations for this Review commence as soon as feasible. 2. Main Agenda: a. Appointment of 2014 Nominating Committee Chair and Chair-Elect Whereas, the BGC reviewed the Expressions of Interest from candidates for the 2014 Nominating Committee ("NomCom") Chair and Chair-Elect, interviewed those candidates and considered the results of a 360-degree evaluation of the 2013 NomCom leadership. Whereas, the BGC has recommended that Cheryl Langdon-Orr be appointed as the 2014 NomCom Chair and Stéphane Van Gelder be appointed as the 2014 NomCom Chair-Elect. Resolved (2013.09.28.10), the Board hereby appoints Cheryl Langdon-Orr as the 2014 Nominating Committee Chair and Stéphane Van Gelder as the 2014 Nominating Committee Chair-Elect. b. Treatment of New gTLD Historical Costs Whereas, ICANN incurred costs over several years to design and prepare the launch of the New gTLD Program. Whereas, the costs incurred from October 2007 (the date of the GNSO recommendation on the New gTLD Program) to the launch of the program ("Historical Development Costs") are to be repaid to ICANN from a portion of the New gTLD Program application fees. Whereas, the Historical Development Costs are charged to the Program progressively as the evaluation work advances and the fees become non-refundable, which began in July 2012. Whereas, the Board Finance Committee has recommended that the amount of Historical Development Costs repaid to ICANN's operating fund from the New gTLD Program be transferred to the Reserve Fund. Resolved (2013.09.28.11), the Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all actions necessary to transfer, when and as appropriate, from ICANN's operating fund to ICANN's Reserve Fund all amounts, whether already paid or to be repaid in the future, that constitute Historical Development Costs. c. Proposed Process for GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Charter Amendments Whereas, The ICANN Bylaws (Article X, Section 5.3) state, "Each [GNSO] Stakeholder Group … and each of its associated Constituencies shall maintain recognition with the ICANN Board." Whereas, it is important that GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies have the flexibility to update, modify and evolve their organizational charters to reflect community changes while balancing the need for validation by the Board. Whereas, there is currently no procedure for a GNSO Stakeholder Group or Constituency to obtain approval by the ICANN Board of Directors for an amendment of its charter. Whereas, the Structural Improvements Committee of the ICANN Board has formulated and recommended a process by which GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies can amend their charters with the Board maintaining its appropriate validation responsibilities for recognition of those GNSO groups. Whereas, the community has had the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed process and changes have been made to the proposed process to address community suggestions. Resolved (2013.09.28.12), the Board approves the process formulated and recommended by the Structural Improvements Committee and directs ICANN Staff to notify the leadership of the various GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies of the process and post a copy of the approved process on the GNSO web site within seven calendar days. d. Clarification Regarding the Competition, Consumer Trust and Choice Metrics for the New gTLD Program per the AoC Review Whereas, on 18 July 2013, the ICANN Board directed the CEO to commence the process for convening the Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (CCT) Review Team to facilitate preliminary work on the feasibility, utility and cost-effectiveness of adopting the recommendations of the GNSO Council and the ALAC, as well as analyzing other potential metrics to be made available for the CCT review. Whereas, the Board wishes to clarify its Resolutions 2013.07.18.06 and 2013.07.18.07 to identify that the actual CCT review is not being commenced at this time, rather that an Implementation Advisory Group for Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice is approved for empanelment. The work of this Advisory Group is intended to be an input to the CCT review at the point in the future when the CCT review is commenced according to the schedule set forth in the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC). Resolved (2013.09.28.13), the Board directs the CEO to convene a volunteer group (the Implementation Advisory Group for Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice) in advance of a future AoC Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team, for the purpose of: (i) evaluating and reporting to the Board on the feasibility, utility and cost-effectiveness of adopting the recommendations of the GNSO Council and the ALAC; (ii) evaluating other inputs, including historical data regarding metrics used to evaluate earlier rounds of new gTLDs (2000, 2004); (iii) engaging with the GNSO, ALAC and staff in an effort to reach agreement on the metrics; and (iv) proposing a set of metrics to be compiled by ICANN to be made available to a future AoC Review Team examining the New gTLD Program. Resolved (2013.09.28.14), the portions of Resolutions 2013.07.18.06 and 2013.07.18.07 suggesting that the CCT review was being commenced prior to the time called for within the AoC are retracted.

1 0

Regarding 2014 Nominating Committee leadership
by Bruce Tonkin Oct. 2, 2013

Oct. 2, 2013

From: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-01oct13-en.htm ICANN Appoints Chair and Chair-Elect for the 2014 Nominating Committee (NomCom) 1 October 2013 The ICANN Board is pleased to announce that it has appointed Cheryl Langdon-Orr as Chair and Stéphane Van Gelder as Chair-Elect for the 2014 Nominating Committee (NomCom) [http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28sep13-en.htm#2…] At Cheryl's request, Yrjö Länsipuro has agreed to serve as Associate Chair for the 2014 NomCom. These three members of the 2014 NomCom Leadership are well-known personalities in the ICANN community with in-depth knowledge of ICANN from many years of involvement and experience in ICANN. Cheryl Langdon-Orr serves as Chair-Elect of the 2013 NomCom, Stéphane Van Gelder is a member of the 2013 NomCom, and Yrjö Länsipuro serves as Chair of the 2013 NomCom and was a member of the 2011 and 2012 NomComs. Cheryl commented on her appointment as Chair of the 2014 NomCom, stating: "I am delighted to be working again in 2014 with Stéphane and Yrjö, having served with them in 2013 whilst Chair Elect, but this time as the 2014 NomCom Leadership Team. We can assure the ICANN Community and Stakeholders, that we will be continuing to build on the continued evolution in practices and changes to ICANN's Nominating Committee transparency that have been seen in 2013. We are looking forward and planning for the 2014 NomCom 'kick off' meeting and activities following the ICANN Public meeting in Buenos Aires in November 2013, which is when the work of the 2014 NomCom starts, and where we formally take our seats with the rest of the appointed Community representatives and voting delegates." After its initial meetings later this year, the 2014 NomCom will issue a public call for applicants to the open ICANN leadership positions and work to reach their final selections in 2014. The NomCom's activities can be followed on the NomCom website, at http://nomcom.icann.org , where all relevant documentation regarding NomCom can be found. About the NomCom Leadership: The NomCom Chair is responsible for organizing the NomCom in its activities to select ICANN Board members and individuals who will serve in other key leadership positions within ICANN's Supporting Organizations (SO) and Advisory Committees (AC) in accordance with ICANN's Bylaws. The Chair-Elect serves alongside the Chair, with anticipated succession into the role of the Chair for the subsequent year's NomCom. The Associate Chair, selected by the Chair, assists with the duties of the Chair. The Chair, the Chair-Elect and Associate Chair are non-voting members of the NomCom.

1 0

REMINDER: Document and Motion deadline Monday 30 SEPTEMBER 2013 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting on 10 OCTOBER 2013 at 18:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 1, 2013

Oct. 1, 2013

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e MONDAY,30 SEPTEMBER 2013 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 10 October 2013 at 18:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+10+Oct.+2013 Thank you very much. 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

5 5