March 2015 - council - lists.icann.org

Project List for your review
by Glen de Saint Géry March 19, 2015

March 19, 2015

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the updated project list, (red lined and clean) for your review. The project list is posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project under the heading Council activities Please be so kind as to replace the contents of http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf 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<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

FW: [Soac-infoalert] Bi-weekly update on IANA Stewardship Transition/ICANN Accountability Discussions
by Jonathan Robinson March 19, 2015

March 19, 2015

From: soac-infoalert-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of David Olive Sent: 19 March 2015 06:05 To: soac-infoalert(a)icann.org Subject: [Soac-infoalert] Bi-weekly update on IANA Stewardship Transition/ICANN Accountability Discussions ICANN has a bi-weekly update on the IANA Stewardship Transition/Accountability discussions that goes out to the wider community to build awareness and to help inform the discussions on the transition and the accountability process, in particular for those who may not be following all the activities and working groups directly. Please find this link <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/vol-2-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussion s> is the second installment of this bi-weekly update. Please feel free to share this with your respective communities. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-discussion-2015-03-17 -en https://www.icann.org/news/blog/vol-2-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussions David A. Olive Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters -Istanbul Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:10 34349 Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +90.212.999.6212 Mobile: + 1. 202.341.3611 Mobile: +90.533.341.6550 Email: david.olive(a)icann.org www.icann.org

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#171]
by Glen de Saint Géry March 19, 2015

March 19, 2015

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: jeudi 19 mars 2015 02:10 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#171] Name of Officer: * rafik dammak Officer Email Address: * rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, March 18, 2015 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCSG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * David Cake won't be able to attend to the GNSO council meeting since he will be traveling during the GNSO council call Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Stephanie Perrin will submit David's vote by proxy for the motions to be approved, and any other matters needing a vote 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] * Saturday, March 21, 2015 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: * Stephanie Perrin

1 0

Please review: Working group to develop recommendations on new gTLD auction proceeds
by Glen de Saint Géry March 18, 2015

March 18, 2015

Dear All, With reference to Item 13: Any Other Business (5 mins) on the GNSO Council agenda<http://www.gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-19mar15-en.htm> for tomorrow 13.1 - CWG on Auction Proceeds The following letter went out to the Constituency/SG/SO/AC Chairs. Attached and copied below, are the 9 responses received to date for you to review before the Council meeting tomorrow and which may perhaps help in determining next steps. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen A working group to develop recommendations on new gTLD auction proceeds During the GNSO weekend sessions at ICANN 52 in Singapore, the GNSO discussed the issue of new gTLD auction proceeds. As you know, new gTLD auction proceeds have been building up and there is no current plan in place for the use or allocation of these funds. In order to commence discussions on a plan for the use of new gTLD auction proceeds, the GNSO would like to form a working group to develop recommendations on this topic. As such, I am reaching out to you to see whether there is an interest to form a cross-community working group on this topic. Note, should there not be sufficient interest to form a cross-community working group at this stage, the GNSO plans to form a GNSO working group on this topic which will be open to anyone interested to participate in. Regardless of which approach is chosen, it is the GNSO's expectation that any work on this topic will be conducted through an open and consultative process allowing everyone interested to participate and provide their perspectives. In order to determine the interest from the different communities in this topic, I would like to ask you to provide an initial response to me by 14 March 2015 at the latest. Based on the feedback received, the GNSO Council will initially discuss how to proceed at its meeting on 19 March 2015. Sincerely, Jonathan Robinson For and on behalf of the ICANN GNSO Council A working group to develop recommendations on new gTLD auction proceeds Input was requested from Constituencies, Stakeholder Groups, Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees Responses were received from: ccNSO GAC Intellectual Property Constituency Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group NRO Executive Council Registrar Stakeholder Group Registries Stakeholder Group W3C ccNSO - Bart Boswinkel Thank you for the invitation to discuss the formation of a cross-community working group to develop recommendations for the allocation of the new gTLD auction proceeds. On behalf of Byron, I want to inform you that this topic will be on the ccNSO Council meetings agenda of 19 March 2015. After the Council meeting we will get back to you as soon as possible. Government Advisory Committee - Olof Nordling on behalf of the GAC Chair Thanks again for your invitation for the GAC to consider involvement in a WG regarding New gTLD auction proceeds. Having circulated this invitation to the GAC Membership, Member comments received so far are all positive, supporting the initiative and GAC involvement, noting synergies with other GAC activities and even providing concrete proposals for the subject matter of how to best use auction proceeds. Accordingly, please note the GAC's support for this initiative, with a GAC preference that this will materialize as a cross-constituency working group. The GAC is looking forward to hearing from you on how the initiative will develop following the GNSO's further consideration and please count on positive involvement by the GAC in upcoming work in line with this initiative. This message is sent on behalf of the GAC Chair. Intellectual Property Constituency - Greg Shatan - Chair I appreciate the opportunity to respond, on behalf of the Intellectual Property Constituency, to the question of whether the GNSO should establish a Working Group to develop recommendations on new gTLD auction proceeds. The IPC believes that such a Working Group should be formed. Auction proceeds represent a significant sum, and are essentially "found money" from running "last chance" auctions where the members of the contention set could not arrive at another option. The IPC is very interested in participating in a Working Group regarding the gTLD auction proceeds, whether it is a GNSO Working Group or a Cross-Community Working Group. If a Cross-Community Working Group is formed, it is critical that the IPC has a member's seat on the CCWG, rather than being forced to participate through a single Commercial Stakeholder Group representative. Each Constituency will have its own opinions, which may be in disagreement with the others, and the Constituencies of the Commercial Stakeholder Group should not be forced to develop a homogenized or compromised opinion. Furthermore, the IPC should not be deprived of the opportunity to participate in decision-making and consensus building. In any event, the IPC looks forward to working with other stakeholders to develop an appropriate plan for the use or allocation of these funds. Based on a preliminary exchange of views, the IPC tends to believe that a primary and substantial use of these funds should benefit the community. Specifically, a substantial portion of these funds should benefit the various SO-AC-SG-C groups, by providing funding for the support initiatives discussed in Los Angeles and Singapore to combat volunteer burnout, provide more sophisticated infrastructure and support, improve knowledge management and increase outreach, engagement and retention. The IPC notes that the current funding for SO-AC-SG-C group support is quite modest, and the plans in progress are both significant and sorely needed. The new gTLD program, and by extension the auctions from which these proceeds were derived, was built on the backs of the stakeholders, many of whom were (and are) volunteers who are not part of the "domain name industry" and who will not reap significant financial benefits from the new gTLD program. This makes it especially fitting that a large amount from these auction proceeds go to support the continuing efforts of the ICANN stakeholder community. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Internet Service Providers and Connectivity Providers Constituency (ISPCP) Osvaldo Novoa volunteered to be the ISPCP representative on the future working group Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group - Rafik Dammak - Chair After consultation, NCSG reached the position to support a CCWG being established and we would also participate in a GNSO working group if it comes to that for any reason. NRO Executive Council - Axel Pawlik - Chair, NRO We have discussed this within the NRO Executive Council. At this time we do not think a whole new CCWG is needed. However, if the GNSO were to set up a working group to discuss principles and develop recommendations, we would support that course of action. Registrar Stakeholder Group - Michele Neylon - RrSG Chair Having discussed this with the RrSG Excom we believe that there should be forward movement on this topic. We can see there being advantages and disadvantages to forming a CCWG, but feel that there should be progress in some form How do the other groups feel about this? Registries Stakeholder Group - Keith Drazek - RySG Chair The RySG is very interested in participating in any community discussions around New gTLD Auction Proceeds. We support a GNSO working group on this topic and will certainly appoint representatives to participate. Please let me know if you need anything else from me. W3C volunteers Daniel Dardailler and Wendy Seltzer 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 1

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#170]
by Glen de Saint Géry March 18, 2015

March 18, 2015

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 18 mars 2015 16:04 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#170] Name of Officer: * rafik dammak Officer Email Address: * rafik.dammak(a)gmai.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmai.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, March 18, 2015 GNSO Organization: * Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * NCSG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Marilia Maciel may be not able to attend to the GNSO council meeting because other urgent commitments. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * Amr Elsadr will submit Marilia's vote by proxy for the motions to be approved, and any other matters needing a vote 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] * Saturday, March 21, 2015 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: * Amr Elsadr

1 0

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#169]
by Glen de Saint Géry March 18, 2015

March 18, 2015

FYI 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/> From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 18 mars 2015 00:07 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#169] Name of Officer: * Greg Shatan Officer Email Address: * gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Date Prepared: * Tuesday, March 17, 2015 GNSO Organization: * Intellectual Property Constituency Officer Position or Title: * President Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * IPC Councilor Brian Winterfeldt anticipates he may be unavailable at the time of the 19-March Council call. If Brian is able to join the call, this proxy should be rescinded. Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * All matters 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, March 20, 2015 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: * Heather Forrest

1 0

Information for upcoming Council discussion on IGO Curative Rights WG
by Mary Wong March 16, 2015

March 16, 2015

Dear Councilors, Here is some information that I hope will assist with your deliberations this Thursday regarding the guidance that the IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protection Working Group will be seeking from the Council. Essentially the WG will be seeking the Council¹s guidance on the scope of its Charter on a specific point, viz. the limitation of its work to considering only those IGOs that were on the GAC-approved list of IGOs. This is the IGO list which the original PDP Working Group on protecting IGOs and INGOs had based their recommendations, one of which was the exploration of a PDP to analyze curative rights protections for these organizations (which led to the initiation of this current PDP). The current WG is now at a point where it believes that it may need to diverge from that Charter limitation, for the following reason. To the extent that a dispute resolution procedure addressing specific IGO needs is to be based on legal rights other than owning a trademark, the WG is inclined to think that this should be based on international law as stated in the treaty known as the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. Under Article 6ter of the Paris Convention, IGO names and acronyms can be protected in member states against third party registrations which are likely to mislead the public as to the existence of a connection with the IGO. Protection is based on a system of notification and communication to all the countries that are bound to observe the obligations imposed by the Convention. Thus, an IGO which seeks protection for its name and/or acronym must first notify WIPO (acting as an intermediary), who then communicates this to all the States to which the Convention would apply. Each State has 12 months to object, but otherwise is then obliged to protect that IGO name and/or acronym in accordance with its national law. The WG has considered the scope, requirements and effect of the Paris Convention in terms of providing an IGO with the necessary ³standing² to file a complaint in the absence of national trademark rights. In contrast, the GAC list of IGOs is not comprised of those IGOs that have sought protection under the Paris Convention, but rather was generated based on criteria corresponding to eligibility for a .int domain (i.e. the organization must be established by an international treaty and be generally considered to possess an international legal personality of its own). While some IGOs on the GAC list have sought Paris Convention protections for either their names, acronyms or both, many have not. As standing to file a complaint under the UDRP and URS corresponds to owning one or more trademark rights, the WG believes that approximating this requirement to specific protection conferred by the Paris Convention is a more substantive basis than using the .int criteria. The WG is therefore seeking the Council¹s guidance as to whether or not proceeding on this basis, despite the language of its Charter, is appropriate and approved. Further information: * Here is the link to the WG Charter, which states in part that "For purposes of this PDP, the scope of IGO and INGO identifiers is to be limited to those identifiers previously listed by the GNSO¹s PDP WG on the Protection of International Organization Identifiers in All gTLDs as protected by their consensus recommendations²: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/igo-ingo-crp-access-charter-24jun14-en.pdf * Here is the relevant language of the Paris Convention (see 6(1)(b), 6(1)(c) and 6(3)(b) for the IGO-specific protections): http://www.wipo.int/article6ter/en/legal_texts/article_6ter.html * Here is the .int criteria: https://www.iana.org/domains/int/policy Please feel free to direct any questions you may have to me and Steve Chan (WG staff support), Mason Cole (GAC-GNSO liaison who has been participating in this WG), Phil Corwin (WG co-chair and Council member) or Susan Kawaguchi (Council liaison to this WG). Thanks and 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

2 1

Reminder: IRTP Self Assessment
by Lars Hoffmann March 16, 2015

March 16, 2015

Dear Counsellors, As a reminder for Thursday¹s Council call, please find attached again the IRTP-D Self Assessment Report, the discussion of which which will form Item 10 on the agenda <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-19mar15-en.htm> . The original email with suggested action items is also attached below. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars From: Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, 26 February 2015 19:14 To: Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: IRTP Self Assessment Dear Counsellors, As you will recall, on 26 March 2014 the Council, based upon a recommendation from the SCI, approved a questionnaire for Working Groups to conduct Self-Assessments when their work has been substantially finished. After an initial test assessment was conducted with the Thick Whois WG, the first formal survey was recently completed by the members of the IRTP Part D PDP Working Group. A detailed Survey Administrator¹s Report containing data tables, charts, graphs, and analyses has been compiled by an independent consultant and is attached for your review. In relation to the Report, Counsellors may wish to: * Discuss how best to utilize this material in terms of future revisions to the PDP Manual and/or GNSO WG Guidelines; * Discuss whether forwarded to Westlake as input to its on-going GNSO Review. You may want to consider discussing these and any other possible options during your forthcoming Council call on 19 March. If you have any further questions/comments, please do not hesitate to get in touch either on-list or off. Many thanks and best wishes, Lars

1 0

Reminder: Multistakeholder Ethos Award - Nomination Period Closes 20 March 2015
by Nathalie Peregrine March 16, 2015

March 16, 2015

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-03-03-en Nomination Period Extended For ICANN Multistakeholder Ethos Award | Award Targeted for ICANN 53 | Nominations Close 20 March 2015 <https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-03-03-en#><https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-03-03-en#><https://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-52fcc7eb2…><https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-03-03-en#><https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-03-03-en#> On 10 December 2015 ICANN announced the opening of the nomination period for ICANN's 2015 Multistakeholder Ethos Award Program. The nomination period has been extended and will close on 20 March 2015. This award program seeks to recognize long-standing community members who have served in leadership roles in multiple ICANN working groups or committees and demonstrated collaboration with different supporting organizations and/or advisory committees. The Multistakeholder Ethos Award recognizes ICANN participants who have deeply invested in consensus-based solutions, recognized the importance of ICANN's multistakeholder model of Internet governance, and contributed in a substantive way to the higher interests of ICANN's organization and its community. A panel of community members has convened to help review all community nominations and determine the best candidate(s) for the award. The decisions of the selection panel will be made based on the following criteria: 1. Demonstrated multistakeholder volunteer service via working groups or committees. 2. Demonstrated spirit of collaboration through engagement with other community members with the aim of consensus building. 3. Demonstrated facilitator of dialogue and open discussion in a fair, cordial and collegial manner. 4. Demonstrated additional devotional factors exhibited by time spent supporting ICANN's multistakeholder model and its overall effectiveness. Candidates for the award will demonstrate at least five years of participation in the ICANN Community. The nomination period for community nominees will close on 20 March 2015. Community members interested in submitting a nomination are invited to send an email toethosaward2015(a)icann.org<mailto:ethosaward2015@icann.org> including: * Name of nominee. * Community of nominee. * Reasons for nomination. Please note that the reasons outlining the candidate's merit for the nomination may be as brief or as long as required. Award recipient(s) will be announced in June 2015 at ICANN 53 in Buenos Aires

1 0

FW: Updated on GNSO Review Working Party Timeline
by Glen de Saint Géry March 12, 2015

March 12, 2015

Forwarded on behalf of: Jen Wolfe Sent: jeudi 12 mars 2015 15:48 The attachment has been posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/drafts And can be viewed directly at: http://gnso.icann.org/en/gnso-review-timeline-schedule-09mar15-en.pdf Dear GNSO Review Working Party, Thank you to everyone for your active participation in our call to provide initial feedback to the Westlake team last week. You diligence in reviewing the report and providing feedback is greatly appreciated! To address concerns regarding the timeline, we have worked with Staff and Westlake to adjust the timeframe for next steps. I have attached a Word document which details the adjusted time frame and also dropped in below a graphic showing the timeline modified to respond to community concerns. Please continue to provide redlines, letters or responses through March 20th, so that Westlake can take this into consideration when revising their report. You can send this through the list or post on the wiki. All comments will be provided to Westlake. When delivering the next version of the report, we have asked Westlake to be clear in stating its rationale for any comments which they do not take incorporate into their report. The next version will be provided as Draft 0 and circulated on April 24th. Please note dates for subsequent calls and meetings to respond to Draft 0 are included on the attached timeline and schedule. I hope you will agree this is helpful in providing additional time to gather and provide feedback in a meaningful way. I look forward to continuing to work with you and welcome your feedback. I wish you all a Happy Spring and look forward to talking again in May! [cid:image001.jpg@01D05CA7.7B492770] jennifer c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB Founder & President, wolfe domain, a digital brand strategy advisory firm 513.746.2800 x 1 or Cell 513.238.4348 IAM 300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists 2011-2014 What will you do with your Dot Brand? : http://ow.ly/Ebl8P Subscribe to Our You Tube Channel on Brand gTLDs http://ow.ly/Eblgc Jen Wolfe gTLD Click Z Column http://ow.ly/EbljP Linked In Group: gTLD Strategy for Brands http://ow.ly/EbloM

1 0