November 2014 - council - lists.icann.org

Proposed GNSO Council Meeting Agenda on 13 November 2014 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry Nov. 6, 2014

Nov. 6, 2014

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed GNSO Council Meeting Agenda on 13 November 2014 at 11:00 UTC also posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+13+November+… And on the website at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-13nov14-en.htm Please note that the clocks have changed, so please make sure to consult the world clock as well, especially if you are travelling. http://tinyurl.com/p2wjsa6 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 Time 11:00 UTC: http://tinyurl.com/p2wjsa6 Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC 03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Brussels; 19:00 Perth Councillors should notify the GNSO Secretariat (gnso-secs(a)icann.org) in advance if a dial out call is needed. Item 1: Administrative matters (5 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 Public meeting 15 October 2014 will be posted as approved on xxxxxx 2014 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) Item 4: MOTION - Adoption of a Charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (20 mins) The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has requested that ICANN "convene a multistakeholder process to develop a plan to transition the U.S. government stewardship role" with regard to the IANA Functions and related root zone management. During discussions around the transition process, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN's accountability given its historical contractual relationship with the United States and NTIA. The concerns raised during these discussions around the transition process indicate that the level of trust into the existing ICANN accountability mechanisms does not yet meet some stakeholder's expectations. Considering that the NTIA has stressed that it was expecting community consensus regarding the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations may prevent the transition to proceed. As a result, a DT was formed with participants, amongst others, from the ccNSO, GNSO, ASO and ALAC to develop a charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. The DT delivered the proposed charter for consideration to all the ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees on 3 November 2014. Here the Council will vote on whether or not to adopt the charter for a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. 4.1 - Review the motion: Motion 1<https://community.icann.org/x/V0PRAg> 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Vote Item 5: MOTION - Changes to GNSO Operating Procedures & Working Group Guidelines to Address Issues relating to Waiver of Motion Deadlines, GNSO Council Voting Outside a Council Meeting & Working Group Consensus Levels (20 mins) The GNSO Council determined that 1) the current GNSO Operating Procedures do not contain a specific provision on waiving the deadline to submit a motion for voting by the GNSO Council; 2) the current GNSO Operating Procedures also do not contain a specific provision that permits the Council to vote outside a meeting; and 3) the language relating to Consensus Levels in the current GNSO Working Group Guidelines, which form Annex I of the GNSO Operating Procedures, may require further clarification. As a result, the GNSO Council requested the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) to consider: 1) whether there should be a modification to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures to address the issues of waiving the deadline for submission of a motion and allowing the Council to vote outside a meeting; and 2) whether the language relating to Consensus Levels in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines requires clarification. The GNSO Council will now consider the changes proposed by the SCI to the GNSO Operating Procedures to address these issues. 5.1 - Review the motion: Motion 2<https://community.icann.org/x/V0PRAg> 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Vote Item 6: - UPDATE - Name Collision (10 mins) On the 30 July 2014, the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board directed staff to "provide information to, and work with the GNSO to consider whether policy work on developing a long-term plan to manage gTLD name collision issues should be undertaken." ICANN Staff submitted this paper to the GNSO Council on 7 October 2014 (see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-gnso-policy-07oc…) and it was presented to the Council during the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. Council members agreed in Los Angeles to discuss with their respective group what further action, if any, should be taken on this topic and report back accordingly during this meeting. Furthermore, a letter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/namazi-to-robinson-30oct14-en.pdf> was received from Cyrus Namazi offering any additional information or assistance that ICANN Staff can provide to further assist the Council in its deliberations. This is an opportunity for the Council to discuss which steps, if any, it would like to take in relation to this topic. 6.1 Discussion 6.2 Next steps Item 7: UPDATE - GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and related work (10 mins) Here the Council will have an opportunity to hear about the work of the GNSO / GAC Consultation Group and from the GNSO Liaison to the GAC including any initial input and feedback derived from the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles. In addition, there will be an opportunity to discuss ideas put forward during the GNSO Council Development Session in relation to potential GNSO work in response to the GAC Communiqué from ICANN meetings. 7.1 - Update (Mason Cole) 7.2 - Discussion Item 8: UPDATE - Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (10 mins) Following adoption of the charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-14…>, this is an opportunity for the Council to receive a brief update on the current status as well as next steps of this CWG. The CWG has been tasked to develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions and has been meeting for 2 hours every week since its creation in view of delivering a final proposal by the end of January 2015. A number of sub-groups have been formed to progress work on the different elements of the ICG Request for Proposals and a face-to-face meeting is being planned for mid-November. For further information, see https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg. 8.1 - Update (Jonathan Robinson) 8.2 - Next steps Item 9: Any Other Business (5 mins) 9.1 Confirmation of Council Liaisons to the different GNSO projects: o Curative Rights Protections for IGO/INGOs PDP - volunteer: none to date o Data & Metrics for Policy Making - volunteer: none to date o Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP - volunteer: James Bladel o Translation & Transliteration PDP - volunteer: Amr Elsadr o Geographic Regions WG - As the effort is wrapping up, Cheryl Langdon-Orr volunteered to keep the Council up to date as she will take over the leadership for this group. o CWG on a Framework for CWG Principles (co-chair position) - volunteer: Avri Doria (John would stay on as GNSO Co-Chair for this effort) o CWG to develop a framework for the use of country and territory names as TLDs (co-chair position) - volunteer: none to date * GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO - volunteer: Thomas Rickert 9.2 Correspondence with NGPC on IGO & RCRC. Any update? 9.3 Skill sets for Nominating Committee. Complete? 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.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00 Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-7+1DST 03:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 04:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+1DST 05:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 06:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+1DST 09:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-2+1DST 09:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 08:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+3+0DST 13:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 19:00 Melbourne, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+1DST 22:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2015, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/p2wjsa6 Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Off Topic: Small world
by James M. Bladel Nov. 6, 2014

Nov. 6, 2014

Hi folks: Just a humous story to share with the list. I arrived home from the ITU Plenipotentiary in Busan to a stack of unread postal mail. Included in the pile was a post card from my alma mater, inviting alumni to come celebrate the 50th anniversary of the University of Iowa Computer Science department. Looking over the schedule of celebrations, one event in particular caught my eye: "Alumni Dinner with UI VP and CS Professor Dan Reed." If I was on the fence about attending, I'm definitely going to go now. :) Thanks- J. ------------ James Bladel Vice President, Policy Go Daddy jbladel(a)godaddy.com Mobile +1 319 899 1776 Twitter: @Bladel Skype: jmbladel Typical Time Zone: UTC-5 (US Central Daylight) [cid:BC04019C-13EF-4E2D-B1FF-B260170C2CE3] This email message and any attachments are intended for use only by the recipient(s), and may contain sensitive information. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original message and any copies.

2 1

GAC Proposal on Geo Names - extended deadline in discussion
by Heather Forrest Nov. 5, 2014

Nov. 5, 2014

Dear Council colleagues, As co-chair of the Cross-Community WG on Country and Territory Names, I have been updated as to discussions within the GAC around extending the comment period on the GAC Proposal on Geographic Names to the end of December. As the Geo Names Proposal originates from individual members within a sub-group of a GAC working group, it seems that the request for more time is motivated by broader GAC interest in a full and robust discussion on this and to more fully and transparently engage with the community, including a session in Singapore. No decisions have yet been made but I assume this will happen soon given the current comment deadline is next Friday 13th. I bring this to Council's attention; if we wish to comment on the possible extension as a group or as individual constituencies, we should do so. I personally support the extension, as I believe that clearer lines of communication with the GAC and a greater willingness to have a real dialogue can only be beneficial and avoid downstream surprises. Various members of the WG on Country and Territory Names are working on responses and the time could support more informative comments. Best wishes, Heather

1 0

Motions for SCI recommendation
by Avri Doria Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

Hi, The attached motion has been prepared by the supporting staff on behalf of the SCI for the upcoming GNSO Council meeting. I have reviewed it and submit it in my name as liaison to the SCI from the Council. The motion still needs a second. The recommendations are in response to GNSO council requests to the SCI and relate to: - mechanism for waiver of the 10 day motion rule - mechanism for voting outside a GNSO council meeting - and a footnote relating to consensus levels against a proposal The SCI reached full consensus on these recommendations. They have been the subject of a comment period, though no comments were received. I recommend approval of these recommendations. Thanks avri

4 6

Resolutions from ICANN Board meeting held by teleconference on 28 October 2014
by Bruce Tonkin Nov. 4, 2014

Nov. 4, 2014

Hello All, Below are the two resolutions from the ICANN Board meeting held by teleconference on 28 Oct 2014. The first item was approval for a contract with a third party to provide GAC secretariat services. The second item related to making a decision to postpone the Marrakech meeting, and find an alternative. The only viable alternative at this time was Singapore, which is the subject of this announcement: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-11-03-en Regards, Bruce Tonkin From: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-28-en Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board 28 Oct 2014 1.Main Agenda: a. Approval of Agreement with Australian Continuous Improvement Group Pty Ltd. for Secretariat Support to the GAC Whereas, Australian Continuous Improvement Group Pty Ltd. (ACIG) is a consulting firm that has provided secretariat support to the GAC pursuant to temporary short-term interim agreements. Whereas, the GAC, ACIG and ICANN desire to finalize a longer-term engagement. Whereas, the temporary short-term agreements to date have not required Board approval; however, the longer-term engagement now under consideration would likely exceed the US$500,000.00 contracting and disbursement limits of the current Disbursement Policy and would therefore require Board approval. Whereas, the GAC has secured the informal commitment of certain donor country GAC members to reimburse ICANN for any disbursements ICANN makes under the proposed agreement and the donor countries have established a not-for-profit association in Switzerland, the GAC Secretariat Funding Association, to provide the funding under this agreement. Whereas, ICANN's acceptance of and reimbursement for these disbursements from the donor countries shall be subject to confirmation that such payments and reimbursements comply with requirements of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and other applicable laws and regulations focused on compliance with anti-corruption and government imposed economic sanctions. Resolved (2014.10.28.01), the Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all actions to enter into the required contracts with, and make all required disbursements to Australian Continuous Improvement Group Pty Ltd. (ACIG), under the following terms: the ACIG agreement shall provide for a one-year term, with ICANN having the right to extend the term of the agreement for an additional successive one-year term, and a second successive term to expire at or around 31 July 2017, upon at least 90-days written notice prior to the expiration of the then current term, with total disbursements during any one-year period not to exceed US$900,000. b. ICANN52 Meeting Location - Move the February 2015 Meeting to an Alternate Location Whereas, on 26 June 2014 the Board previously designated Marrakech, Morocco as the February 2015 location for ICANN's 52nd Public Meeting. Whereas, ICANN is committed to holding three public meetings in 2015. Whereas, unforeseen circumstances, including increasing community concern, lead ICANN to postpone Marrakech as a host location for an ICANN Public Meeting until 2016, and identify an alternative location for ICANN52 (for 8-12 February 2015) as quickly as possible. Whereas, ICANN has a limited opportunity to secure the required facilities sufficient to host an ICANN Public Meeting in an alternative location for the previously announced dates. Resolved (2014.10.28.02), the Board approves the postponement of hosting an ICANN public meeting in Marrakech, Morocco until 2016 and authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all actions necessary to confirm the postponement. Resolved (2014.10.28.03), the Board approves the identification of an alternative location for ICANN52 from 8-12 February 2015, and authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all actions necessary to hold the ICANN52 Meeting in an alternative location. Resolved (2014.10.28.04), the Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to engage in and facilitate all necessary contracting and disbursements for the alternative Meeting venue for ICANN52 Public Meeting, from 8-12 February 2015 in an amount not to exceed US$2 million. Resolved (2014.10.28.05), the Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to use the Reserve Fund for additional costs associated with an alternative location for the Meeting, in an amount not to exceed US$1.0 million. Resolved (2014.10.28.06), the Board directs the President and CEO to continue to assess the circumstances, including travel restrictions, relating to the alternative location for ICANN 52, and periodically advise the Board. Resolved (2014.10.28.07), specific items within this resolution and rationale shall remain confidential pursuant to Article III, section 5.2 of the ICANN Bylaws until the President and CEO determines that the confidential information may be released, as soon as reasonably possible

1 0

Letter from Steve Crocker to GAC Chair regarding GNSO/GAC role in gTLD policy development
by Mary Wong Nov. 3, 2014

Nov. 3, 2014

Dear Council members, You and your communities will likely be interested in the latest letter sent by Board Chair Steve Crocker to new GAC Chair Thomas Schneider, responding to that part of the GAC advice in its London Communique in which the GAC commented that protections for Red Cross designations ought not to be conditioned on a PDP: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/crocker-to-schneider-03 nov14-en.pdf Pertinent parts of Dr Crocker¹s letter include the following excerpt: "While the GAC may participate in the policy development process, and has a role to ³provide advice on the activities of ICANN as they relate to concerns of governments, particularly matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN¹s policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues,² the GNSO has the authority to recommend substantive policies on topics that are within the scope of ICANN¹s mission statement, has potentially broad applicability to multiple situations or organizations, is likely to have lasting value or applicability, and will establish a guide or framework for future decision-making. The Board has concerns about the advice in the London Communiqué because it appears to be inconsistent with the framework established in the Bylaws granting the GNSO authority to recommend consensus policies to the Board, and the Board to appropriately act upon policies developed through the bottom-up consensus policy developed by the GNSO.² Dr Crocker¹s letter also serves to ³kick off² the prescribed Board-GAC consultation process envisaged in the ICANN Bylaws in instances where the Board disagrees with GAC advice. Cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org

1 0

RE: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets
by Winterfeldt, Brian J. Oct. 31, 2014

Oct. 31, 2014

Thanks very much for your comments, David. I would pose the exact same questions back with respect to the suggestion to add “data protection and privacy law.” Likewise, pardon my teasing, but are you suggesting that the six representatives the NCSG already generally provides to council are somehow inadequate in this regard? In the end, I think it would be great if more folks in leadership positions within ICANN exhibited a demonstrated comprehension (and better yet, a commitment toward the protection) of intellectual property law. Best regards, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt Head of Internet Practice Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118 p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244 575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585 p / (212) 940.6762 f / (212) 894.5585 brian.winterfeldt(a)kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> ________________________________ From: David Cake Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 5:09:36 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) To: Winterfeldt, Brian J. Cc: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets I would have thought this was an odd request for the IPC to make, as it implies the two intellectual property lawyers that IPC already generally provides to council are somehow inadequate. Or perhaps you are suggesting that council needs more people who are able to provide an expert intellectual property law perspective from outside the IPC, in which case I agree :-) But if you'll pardon my teasing above - more seriously, while I absolutely agree that intellectual property law expertise is valuable to council, I would have thought intellectual property law is also one area of expertise that council is pretty much guaranteed to possess, and the NomCom appointees are designed more to fill gaps, rather than bolster areas of relative strength? David On 30 Oct 2014, at 11:59 pm, Winterfeldt, Brian J. <brian.winterfeldt(a)kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com>> wrote: Dear all: Based on recommendations by others, and a shift from the ambiguous to the explicit, I note that intellectual property law is absent from the criteria. Accordingly I would ask for the following amendment. • International law • Competition law • Intellectual property law • Public interest issues • Consumer rights • Human rights • Economics, especially market analysis • Market mechanisms and dynamics • Business principles Thank you, Brian Brian J. Winterfeldt Head of Internet Practice Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 2900 K Street NW, North Tower - Suite 200 / Washington, DC 20007-5118 p / (202) 625-3562 f / (202) 339-8244 575 Madison Avenue / New York, NY 10022-2585 p / (212) 940.6762 f / (212) 894.5585 brian.winterfeldt(a)kattenlaw.com<mailto:brian.winterfeldt@kattenlaw.com> / www.kattenlaw.com<http://www.kattenlaw.com/> ________________________________________ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.orgOn<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.orgOn> Behalf OfVolker Greimann Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:43:28 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) To: David Cake; jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info> Cc: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets I agree with David's suggested additions. instead of financial services businesses, general business experience may be more appropriate. Volker Am 30.10.2014 07:15, schrieb David Cake: > I would consider adding to the list of variable criteria: > - data protection and privacy law > - broader internet governance activities > > I'm also not sure why 'the special needs of financial services businesses' is on that list - not that I have a strong objection to anyone having this expertise, but I do not recall any item of council business having looked at this area in the last couple of years (though it is possible something is slipping my mind). > > David > > On 30 Oct 2014, at 10:02 am, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>> wrote: > >> <NomCom - GNSO Candidate Criteria.docx> -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net/> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.rrpproxy.net/> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com/> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.brandshelter.com/> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu/> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net/> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.rrpproxy.net/> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com/> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.brandshelter.com/> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu/> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone. =========================================================== CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. =========================================================== NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997). ===========================================================

4 3

FW: Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework
by Jonathan Robinson Oct. 31, 2014

Oct. 31, 2014

All, Please see attached. Jonathan From: Cyrus Namazi [mailto:cyrus.namazi@icann.org] Sent: 30 October 2014 13:07 To: Jonathan Robinson Cc: Marika Konings; Francisco Arias Subject: Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework Hi Jonathan: I hope this email finds you well. Attached please find a letter in reference to GNSO consideration of undertaking policy work, per NGPC resolution 2014.07.30.NG03 on Implementing Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework. Sincerely, Cyrus Namazi ICANN Vice President | Domain Name Services & Industry Relation | Global Domains Division 801 17th St NW, Suite 400 | Washington, DC 20006 USA +1.202.249.7543 Office | +1.408.421.6894 Mobile | cyrus.namazi(a)icann.org www.icann.org

1 0