February 2013 - council - lists.icann.org

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#116]
by Glen de Saint Géry 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mercredi 13 février 2013 18:36 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#116] Name of Officer: * Steve DelBianco Officer Email Address: * sdelbianco(a)netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, February 13, 2013 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: * Because of a court appointment, Councilor Zahid Jamil will need to leave the Council call 30 minutes after it begins. He will return to the call as soon as possible. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Topics that come before the Council 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, February 15, 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: * John Berard

1 0

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#115]
by Glen de Saint Géry 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : mercredi 13 février 2013 11:58 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#115] Name of Officer: * Robin gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, February 13, 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 GNSO council mtg on 14 Feb. David Cake will serve as wolfgang's proxy. 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, February 15, 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: * David cake

1 0

Letter from ICANN Board to GAC on Enforcing new gTLD applicant commitments
by Bruce Tonkin 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

Hello All, Please see attached letter from the chair of the ICANN Board to the GAC chair regarding Enforcing Applicant Commitments. Below is a plain text summary. Regards, Bruce Tonkin Dear Heather, On behalf of the Board, I write to follow up on our commitment in our letter of 16 January 2013, to provide a report on our efforts to address one item of advice contained in the GAC Toronto Communiqué. Background In its Toronto Communiqué, the GAC requested a written briefing from the ICANN Board on "how ICANN will ensure that any commitments made by [New gTLD] applicants, in their applications or as a result of any subsequent changes, will be overseen and enforced by ICANN." The GAC advised the Board that, "it is necessary for all of these statements of commitment and objectives to be transformed into binding contractual commitments, subject to compliance oversight by ICANN." In our letter of 16 January 2013, we indicated that there was no existing mechanism in the New gTLD program to address the GAC's concerns. To respond to the GAC's advice and the concerns raised by others in the community, staff was asked to develop possible mechanisms to transform applicant commitments (either as set forth within their applications or arising from early warning discussions between applicants and governments) into contractually binding and enforceable obligations. The Board considered the staff proposals at the Board Workshop in Los Angeles on 31 January 2013 - 2 February 2013. I am happy to report that ICANN has undertaken specific steps to address this item of GAC advice. On 1 February 2013, the New gTLD Program Committee adopted a resolution directing ICANN's President and CEO to seek public comment on a proposed "Public Interest Commitments" specification ("PIC Spec") to be added to each new gTLD registry agreement. (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-01feb13… ) On 5 February 2013, ICANN opened a public comment forum seeking comment on a revised draft of the New gTLD Registry Agreement that includes the new PIC Spec. (http://www.icann.org/en/news/publiccomment/base-agreement-05feb13-en.htm ) "Public Interest Commitments" The proposed PIC Spec is a mechanism by which applicants may incorporate additional commitments into their Registry Agreements. As proposed, the PIC Spec has one mandatory provision and two optional provisions. It would require the Registry Operator to use only those registrars that sign onto the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement. It would also allow the Registry Operator to contractually agree to follow the commitments made in certain sections of its application for the gTLD (the specific sections to be selected by the Registry Operator). Finally, it would allow the Registry Operator to identify specific additional commitments - which could be even broader than those undertaken in the application - that it will follow in the operation of the registry. Each PIC Spec completed by an applicant would be posted for public review in advance of the Beijing meeting. Once finalized, the relevant PIC Spec would be attached to the relevant Registry Agreement. The Registry Agreement would not be signed until the PIC Spec is completed. Enforcement The commitment to use only Registrars that have signed the new RAA will be enforceable through the regular contractual compliance process within ICANN. The additional commitments would primarily be enforceable by third parties through a revised Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Process. Once the Registry Agreement is in operation, third parties who suffer actual harm as a result of the Registry Operator's alleged noncompliance with the additional commitments or restrictions contained in the PIC Spec would have standing to proceed to dispute resolution. This dispute resolution procedure would be made part of the existing Registry Restriction Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PDDRP) and Trademark PDDRP http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb . First, there would be a mandatory conciliation phase during which the third party and the Registry Operator are expected to try to informally resolve the issue. If the issue cannot be resolved, the third party complainant will then proceed to a Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure (PIC-DRP) operated by a dispute resolution provider. If the provider issues findings and recommendations that the Registry Operator is violating the PIC Spec, the matter would then proceed to ICANN's Contractual Compliance for enforcement. Timeframe As noted above, the PIC Spec and other proposed revisions to the Registry Agreement were posted for public comment on 5 February 2013. Applicants were also invited to optionally designate which parts of their application and which additional promises they will agree to have included in their registry agreement. Applicants' PICs are due on 5 March 2013, and will be publicly posted for public and GAC review. I hope that you find the above responsive to the GAC's request for a written briefing on enforcing applicant commitments and that it addresses the GAC's advice on this subject. Best regards, Stephen D. Crocker, Chair, ICANN Board

1 1

A recap of todays ccNSO Council meeting
by john＠crediblecontext.com 12 Feb '13

12 Feb '13

Hello, all. I participated today in my first ccNSO Council call as GNSO Council liaison. One thing, for sure, I won't be recommending we adopt their practice of monthly calls at the same hour. They are all at 4 a.m. Pacific. Lesley Cowley of Nominet is the chair and she was quite gracious in her welcome. In some order, here are the things that might be of interest: 1. There is some concern about Fadi's CEO roundtable approach to problem solving. Peter van Roste, general manager of CENTR, said they were causing his members "ulcers" and that "the secrecy is a problem." Cowley spoke up that there was not secrecy attached to her invitation to the next roundtable. 2. They decided to not comment on either the work of the GNSO Council on Consumer Metrics or meet the request of the board for comment as embedded in the 12.10.11 resolution. The conclusion was that "it is not ccNSO business." 3. There was a discussion and willingness expressed to meet with the GNSO Council in Beijing, but that there needs to be better preparation; Cowley said: "We don't know quite what we are doing there sometimes." 4. Of specific note is that with the membership of the Faroe Islands (.fo), the ccNSO has 135 members. Cheers, Berard

2 1

Exploring More Effective Forms of Engagement - GNSO Non Contract Parties Gather in Los Angeles
by Glen de Saint Géry 11 Feb '13

11 Feb '13

http://blog.icann.org/2013/02/exploring-more-effective-forms-of-engagement-… Exploring More Effective Forms of Engagement - GNSO Non Contract Parties Gather in Los Angeles by David Olive on February 11, 2013 January was a busy month for ICANN community engagement. Building on the successes of the DNS Industry CEO roundtable event and the Europe regional Registry/Registrar meeting, the Non-Contracted community of the GNSO held its first intersessional meeting in Los Angeles as well. This two-day gathering convened 43 non-contract community leaders from the GNSO as well as other community members participating remotely. The group represented a healthy mix of ICANN veterans and several new participants from both the Commercial Stakeholder Group, including the Business, Intellectual Property and Internet Service Provider constituencies, and the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group, including the Non-Commercial Users and Not-for-Profit Operational Concerns constituencies. One of the purposes of the meeting was to create the opportunity-outside of the pressures and schedule strains of an ICANN Public Meeting-for community leaders to discuss longer-range substantial community issues, build relationships, and collaborate with each other, as well as senior ICANN staff, on strategic and operational issues that impact the GNSO NCPH community. Throughout the course of the meeting, the participants interacted with President and CEO Fadi Chehadé (who provided an overview of the strategic challenges and opportunities facing ICANN) as well as Sally Costerton and Tarek Kamel (who updated the community on engagement efforts across the ICANN ecosystem) and Xavier Calvez, CFO (who provided an overview of the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget and SO/AC request processes). Christine Willett briefed the participants on the status of the new gTLD program while Margie Milam discussed the latest RAA Negotiations and WHOIS efforts. The senior staff greatly enjoyed hosting the community at ICANN Los Angeles because of the access it provided for engagement and discussion. As a result of the various working sessions, the staff is now evaluating community requests for support and prioritizing solutions to meet these needs. As always, the recordings and transcripts of the sessions are available on the community Wiki page as resources. See - https://community.icann.org/display/ncph/Transcripts and https://community.icann.org/display/ncph/MP3+Recordings. Without a doubt, the intersessional meeting of the GNSO NCPH community set an important precedent for engagement. We appreciate the goodwill and creative contributions made by several planning volunteers (including Marilyn Cade, Robin Gross, Michael Adams, Alain Berranger, Bill Drake, Tony Holmes, Steve Metalitz, Klaus Stoll and Marc Trachtenberg) to make this gathering a productive experience for all. We are grateful for the thoughtful contributions and active participation of the community throughout the two days. Above all else, the event provided a dynamic and intimate setting for open exchange and interaction on various topics and collaborative efforts between the community and staff, advancing ICANN's unique bottom-up, consensus-drive multi-stakeholder model. Staff will be preparing a thorough report on the resource impacts and utility of the meeting. We welcome any community comments and ideas about the Los Angeles meeting in particular and more generally on the value of these types of meetings outside the normal ICANN Public Meeting rotation. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Draft GNSO Council agenda for 14 February 2013 updated on 11 February 2013
by Glen de Saint Géry 11 Feb '13

11 Feb '13

Dear Councillors, Please find the updated draft agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 14 February 2013 at 11:00 UTC. The following updates have been made: Item 1.4 A link has been added to the approved minutes for the Council meeting on 21 January 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-21jan13-en.htm>. Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) 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. Note : Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. These projects are as follows: * Outreach Task Force * RAPWG Recommendation on Cross-TLD Registration Scam Item 6 is changed to an UPDATE and Discussion - Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (15 minutes) Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - The issue of "closed generic" TLDs (15 minutes) - Staff will provide a background paper Minor updates have been made in the time allowed for some of the items. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 2013 The agenda is published on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14feb13-en.htm On the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+-+14+Februar… 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/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-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 11:00 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5 Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris; 00:00 Wellington 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 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 Council meeting on 17 January 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-17jan13-en.htm> and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-21jan13-en.htm> have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures. Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include brief review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) 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. Note : Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. These projects are as follows: * Outreach Task Force * RAPWG Recommendation on Cross-TLD Registration Scam Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - Recent meetings in Amsterdam & LA (15 minutes) Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA. This item provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues arising. 4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 4.2 Discussion 4.3 Next steps (if any) Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes) ICANN's CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman Proposal<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/chehade-to-robinson-04dec12-en.pdf> developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment. http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm. ICANN's CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a "limited preventative registration mechanism" which is also currently available for public comment. A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN's CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013. Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2). The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken. The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations. 5.1 Update (Mason Cole) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next Steps Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (15 minutes) At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested that the GNSO continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis. In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any concern such as with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013. 6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps (if any) Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - The issue of "closed generic" TLDs (15 minutes) The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed generic" TLDs, concurrent with the opening of the public comment forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public comment forum. (7 March) 7.1 Background (Staff) 7.2 Discussion 7.3 Next steps (if any) Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes) The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset. Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j…> that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic. 8.1 Discussion 8.2 Next steps Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (15 minutes) At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey<http://toronto45.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/presentation-whois-survey-1…> that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study. 9.1 - Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - Planning for Beijing (15 minutes) Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning. Council VC Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback 10.1 - Update (Mason Cole) 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: 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 October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+0DST 03:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 09:00 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 - next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5 Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

TR: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#114]
by Glen de Saint Géry 10 Feb '13

10 Feb '13

FYI De : ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Envoyé : dimanche 10 février 2013 23:19 À : gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Objet : GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#114] Name of Officer: * Robin Gross Officer Email Address: * robin(a)ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> Date Prepared: * Sunday, February 10, 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: * Magaly Pazello will be absent from the Feb. 14 2013 GNSO Council Meeting, and Maria Farrell will hold the proxy for Magaly. 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, February 15, 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

Report from Fadi Chehadé on Registrar Accreditation Agreement Negotiation Session
by Bruce Tonkin 08 Feb '13

08 Feb '13

http://blog.icann.org/2013/02/registrar-accreditation-agreement-negotiation… Registrar Accreditation Agreement Negotiation Session by Fadi Chehadé on February 7, 2013 Building on the great work that has been achieved to date, yesterday I met with the Registrar Stakeholder Group's Negotiating Team to continue with negotiations toward a new Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). We started the day by affirming our commitment to further, in good faith, a new RAA that will address the needs of the community as well as prepare the Internet domain name system for a new season of growth. The RAA negotiations provide an important opportunity to carefully balance the various requirements voiced by the ICANN community, as well as to evolve relations with the registrars who are at the frontline delivering the innovation and consumer choice enabled by the new gTLD program. We discussed several items that had been tabled since this group met last year and made headway in considering additional enhancements that will complete the agreement in a manner that best achieves our goals rooted in the public interest. We continued to explore how the proposed RAA can be synchronized with the new gTLD Registry Agreement that ICANN published for comment on 5 February 2013. Assuming such alignment, this will bring a more cohesive framework across these agreements. I will endeavor, with every tool available, to ensure that all agreements with our contracted parties are embraced in the broadest way plausible, and furthermore to support efforts by ICANN as it works to create a level playing field for all participants in this growing sector. Without compromising any of our principles, we hope to achieve closure as soon as possible. I look forward to continuing this spirited and collaborative dialogue with the registrars as ICANN and the registrars are committed to moving through this process in a deliberative and expeditious way.

1 0

GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 14 February 2013 at 11:00UTC:
by Glen de Saint Géry 07 Feb '13

07 Feb '13

Dear Councillors, Please find the draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on: The agenda is published on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-14feb13-en.htm On the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+-+14+Februar… Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 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/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-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 11:00 UTC<http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5 Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris; 00:00 Wellington 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 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 Council meeting on 17 January 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-17jan13-en.htm> have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January 2013<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg14133.html> will be approved on 8 February 2013 per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Include brief review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSION - Recent meetings in Amsterdam & LA (15 minutes) Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA. This item provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues arising. 4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben) 4.2 Discussion 4.3 Next steps (if any) Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes) ICANN's CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman Proposal<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/chehade-to-robinson-04dec12-en.pdf> developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment. http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm. ICANN's CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a "limited preventative registration mechanism" which is also currently available for public comment. A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN's CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013. Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2). The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken. The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations. 5.1 Update (Mason Cole) 5.2 Discussion 5.3 Next Steps Item 6: DISCUSION - Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (10 minutes) At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested that the GNSO continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis. In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any concern such as with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a Reserved Names List in section 2.2.1.2.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013. 6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps (if any) Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSION - The issue of "closed generic" TLDs (10 minutes) The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed generic" TLDs, , concurrent with the opening of the public comment forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public comment forum. (7 March) 7.1 Update 7.2 Discussion 7.3 Next steps (if any) Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSION - Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes) The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset. Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j…> that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic. 8.1 Discussion 8.2 Next steps Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (10 minutes) At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey<http://toronto45.icann.org/meetings/toronto2012/presentation-whois-survey-1…> that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study. 9.1 - Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - Planning for Beijing (10 minutes) Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning. Council VC Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback 10.1 - Update (Mason Cole) 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: 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 v2.5)<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-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 October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-8+0DST 03:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+1DST 09:00 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 Abuja, Nigeria (WAT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html>) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Karachi, Pakistan (PKT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00 Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 19:00 Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.html> ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 - next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/alhxou5 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

New gTLD Applicant Update Webinar - 5 Feb 2013
by Bruce Tonkin 06 Feb '13

06 Feb '13

Hello All, From: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/webinars Attached is the presentation from the new gTLD applicant update webinar held on 5 Feb 2013. Regards, Bruce Tonkin

1 0