April 2015 - council - lists.icann.org

FW: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#172]
by Glen de Saint Géry April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

FYI From: ICANN [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: mercredi 8 avril 2015 18:27 To: gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org; council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#172] Name of Officer: * Michele Neylon Officer Email Address: * michele(a)blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com> Date Prepared: * Wednesday, April 8, 2015 GNSO Organization: * Registrars Stakeholder Group Officer Position or Title: * RrSG Chair Voting Remedy: * Proxy Reason(s) for or condition(s) leading to the remedy: * Volker is on parental leave from April 15 to May 14 Specific subject(s)/measure(s)/motion(s)/action(s) of the Council for which the remedy is being exercised: * any and all Date upon which the remedy will expire or terminate: [Note: may not exceed 3 months initially; may be renewed by sending an email with explanation to GNSO Secretariat] * Saturday, May 16, 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: * James Bladel

1 0

Proposed GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on Thursday, 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC. This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-13nov14-en.pdf>, approved and updated on 13 November 2014. 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. Coordinated Universal Time: 11:00 (http://tinyurl.com/ovobxvt) 04:00 Los Angeles; 07:00 Washington; 12:00 London; 13:00 Brussels; 19:00 Perth GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast To join the event click on the link: http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat 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 meeting of 11 February and 19 March 2015 will be posted as approved on xxxx 2015. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 mins) 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics, to include review of Projects List<http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items>. 2.2 - Comments or questions arising. Item 3: Consent agenda (5 mins) 3.1 - Approval to refer two matters<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/drafts> (first submitted to the Council on 5 March 2015) to the GNSO's Standing Committee for Improvements Implementation (SCI). The first<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20…> concerning GNSO Council practices for proposing, seconding and amendment of motions and the second<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20…> on clarifying the Operating Procedures regarding the waiver and resubmission of motions Item 4: MOTION - Proposed amendment to Charter of the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP Working Group (10 mins) The IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP Working Group was chartered<https://community.icann.org/x/77rhAg> by the GNSO Council in June 2014 to explore possible ways of addressing the specific needs of international governmental and non-governmental organizations with respect to curative rights protection for their organizational names and acronyms at the second level. In March 2015 the WG requested<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg17132.html> that the GNSO Council consider amending the WG charter to provide it with greater flexibility in determining possible eligibility criteria for IGOs and INGOs regarding curative rights protections. Here the Council will vote on whether or not to accede to the WG's request. 4.1 - Presentation of motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20…> (Susan Kawaguchi / Phil Corwin) 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Vote Item 5: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (15 mins) The CWG<https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg>-Transition was chartered<https://community.icann.org/x/2grxAg> to develop a proposal on Naming Related Functions for the IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal. A draft proposal was published for community comment on 1 December 2014, following which a revised timeline and update was provided for discussion at ICANN52 in Singapore. In March 2015, the CWG-Transition held a face-to-face meeting with the goal to publish its updated proposal for public comment in late April. Given that the GNSO is a chartering organisation of the CWG-Transition and will need to approve the CWG's ultimate proposal, this is an opportunity for the Council to review and discuss the CWG's work and to determine what, if any, issues arise from a GNSO or Council perspective at this stage. 5.1 - Status summary (Jonathan Robinson) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Next steps Item 6: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (15 mins) In discussions around the IANA stewardship 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 community concerns indicate that the level of trust regarding existing ICANN accountability mechanisms does not yet meet some stakeholders' expectations. Considering that the NTIA has stressed that it expects community consensus on the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations could be a possible impediment to timely progress of the transition. The GNSO is one of the chartering organizations for the CCWG-Accountability<https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg>, having adopted the charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en…> in November 2014. The CCWG developed two work streams, of which the first is intended to align with the timing of the CWG-Transition work and the overall NTIA objectives and timeline. Here the Council will have the opportunity to consider how it can continue to facilitate the progress of this CCWG, especially in view of the work and timelines of the CWG-Transition. 6.1 Status summary (Thomas Rickert) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next steps Item 7: DISCUSSION - Proposed ICANN FY16 Budget (10 mins) On 18 March 2015 ICANN published its draft FY16 Operating Plan and Budget for public comment. During the ICANN meeting in Singapore in February 2015, several community members had raised concerns over the budget allocation and appropriate funding targets for effective outreach for and conduct of GNSO policy work. Here the Council will discuss the draft Budget, with a view toward considering its potential effect on the GNSO's role and work and a possible comment to be submitted by the Council. 7.1 Introduction of the topic (Volker Greimann) 7.2 Discussion 7.3 Next steps Item 8: UPDATE - Progress of Work on GNSO Council Template for Feedback on GAC Communiques (10 mins) At the last Council meeting, Council members Carlos Raúl Gutierrez and David Cake had volunteered to assist Volker Greimann with populating the template<http://gnso.icann.org/en/gnso-gac-review-24feb15-en.pdf> using the Singapore GAC Communiqué as the basis for possible comment, and identify potential topics subject to existing policy recommendations or for future policy work. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the project, and consider next steps. 8.1 - Update (David Cake / Carlos Gutierrez) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: DISCUSSION - Remaining Items from the GNSO's Strategic Discussion Session in Singapore (15 minutes) At the February 2015 ICANN meeting in Singapore, the GNSO engaged in an open and strategic discussion concerning the effective functioning of the GNSO Council and the community as a whole. Here the Council will aim to conclude the discussion, with the emphasis on reviewing its goals and performance based on the objectives and priorities identified during its Development Session at ICANN51 in Los Angeles in October 2014. 9.1 Update<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-gnso-strategic-discuss…> - Jonathan Robinson / Marika Konings 9.2 Discussion Item 10: Any Other Business (10 mins) 10.1 - CWG on Auction Proceeds (update: Jonathan Robinson) 10.2 - Buenos Aires meeting planning (update: David Cake / Jonathan Robinson) _____________________________ 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 March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-7+1DST 04:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-5+1DST 06:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+1DST 06:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 07:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+0DST 08:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+0DST 08:00 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 12:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 13:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 13:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 14:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+3+0DST 14:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 19:00 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+1DST 21:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2015, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com http://tinyurl.com/ovobxvt 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 http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Clarification (Re: [council] SCI motions)
by Mary Wong April 8, 2015

April 8, 2015

Hello all, I should have made it clear that on the voting question, the Chair will call for a vote to adopt the item(s) on the consent agenda; however, this is not the same type of voting as would be the case for a ³regular² motion on the main agenda, where there will be an opportunity to discuss, abstain or vote against. As such, the main point of my message remains the same if there is a need for discussion, questions and/or a wish to register a vote against an item, the process is to request that the item be removed from the consent agenda. Sorry if in trying to clarify matters I made things even murkier, and thanks to Jonathan and Marika for the reminders! 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 From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 at 00:29 To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr(a)egyptig.org>, "avri(a)acm.org" <avri(a)acm.org> Cc: Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] SCI motions > Hello everyone, and with thanks to Avri and Amr not just for the motions but > also for their work on the SCI! > > This is just a note to state that, for items on the consent agenda, no vote > will be necessary any items needing approval will be passed unless a > Councilor objects, in which case that item will then be placed on the main > agenda for further discussion and, where applicable, a vote. As such, > Councilors are requested to review the two templates outlining the two > possible referral requests to the SCI that were sent around before the last > Council meeting (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/drafts for the relevant > links dated 5 March 2015). If you wish to question or discuss either template, > you will therefore have to ask that it be taken off the consent agenda (note > that this can be done at the meeting itself when the consent agenda comes up). > > Should that occur, the motions that Avri submitted and that Amr seconded will > then be considered to have been submitted within the prescribed time frame for > motions. At that time, they will then be considered and discussed with a view > toward conducting an actual vote on both. > > I hope this clarifies matters. > > 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 > > > > From: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr(a)egyptig.org> > Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 13:38 > To: "avri(a)acm.org" <avri(a)acm.org> > Cc: Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [council] SCI motions > >> Hi, >> >> Being on both the Council and the SCI, I would be happy to second both >> motions, and support them being on the consent agenda. To my knowledge, there >> is consensus among the SCI members for the committee to take up this work. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr >> >> On Apr 6, 2015, at 6:18 PM, Avri Doria <avri(a)ACM.ORG> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I submit the following 2 motions for the council meeting of 16 April. >>> >>> >>> Motion on Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) Review >>> Request Concerning Seconding and Amendments >>> Motion on Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) Review >>> Request Concerning Overlap of Waiver and Resubmission >>> >>> >>> The have not yet been seconded. I ask any of the other SCI members on the >>> council to consider seconding these motions. >>> >>> I request that these be included in the consent agenda. They were discussed >>> at our last meeting and there have been no objections to the templates. As >>> requred they are motions that require a simple majority vote and are not >>> subject to absentee ballot. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >>> <http://www.avast.com/> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast >>> antivirus software. >>> www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/> >>> <Motion on SCI Review Request Concerning Motion Seconding and Amendments 06 >>> April 2015.docx><Motion on SCI Review Request Concerning Overlap of Waiver >>> and Resubmittion 06 April 2015.docx><SCI Review Request - Motions - 5 Mar >>> 2015 v2.docx><SCI Review Request - Overlap of Waiver and Resubmission - 5 >>> Mar 2015.docx> >>

1 0

SCI motions
by Avri Doria April 7, 2015

April 7, 2015

Hi, I submit the following 2 motions for the council meeting of 16 April. *Motion on Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) Review Request Concerning Seconding and Amendments* *Motion on Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) Review Request Concerning Overlap of Waiver and Resubmission* The have not yet been seconded. I ask any of the other SCI members on the council to consider seconding these motions. I request that these be included in the consent agenda. They were discussed at our last meeting and there have been no objections to the templates. As requred they are motions that require a simple majority vote and are not subject to absentee ballot. Thanks avri Thanks. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com

4 3

motion for IGO-INGO WG charter amendment
by Susan Kawaguchi April 7, 2015

April 7, 2015

As council liaison to the IGO-INGO working group I respectfully submit this motion for the council’s consideration. Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064

5 5

REMINDER: Document and Motion deadline Monday, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry April 6, 2015

April 6, 2015

Dear Councillors, REMINDER Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20… 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

1 0

REMINDER: Document and Motion deadline Monday, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry April 3, 2015

April 3, 2015

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20… 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

1 0

FW: [CWG-Stewardship] Vol. 3: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions
by Jonathan Robinson April 2, 2015

April 2, 2015

All, Please see below (and linked) for a comprehensive update on the work relating to the IANA stewardship transition including implications for ICANN accountability. You may find this interesting and informative but so too will members of your the groups that you represent on Council, especially since they will ultimately be called on to approve the work. Therefore, please flag / distribute as you see fit. Jonathan From: Grace Abuhamad [mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org] Sent: 02 April 2015 02:42 To: cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Vol. 3: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions See https://www.icann.org/news/blog/vol-3-update-on-iana-stewardship-discussions Vol. 3: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-discussion-31m…> Download PDF version of Vol. 3: Update on IANA Stewardship Discussions here. [PDF, 507 KB] ICANN is compiling bi-weekly updates on the community discussions and progress of the IANAStewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN Accountability Processes. This information is positioned to help inform interested stakeholders in the recent developments in the processes, upcoming key dates, latest documents and drafts and a snapshot of any news coverage that occurs over the timeframe. In brief · The Cross-Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions ( <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IAN…> CWG-Stewardship) and Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ( <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+A…> CCWG-Accountability) held face-to-face meetings in Istanbul, Turkey, during the week of 23 March 2015 with a common goal: the successful transition of theIANA functions stewardship to the global multistakeholder community. · Both CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability plan to make draft proposals available for Public Comment in the lead-up to <https://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/> ICANN 53 in Buenos Aires, 21-25 June 2015. · As work on the IANA Stewardship Transition continues to build momentum, a number of communities are beginning to submit formal statements and recommendations to the CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability. An overview of CCWG-Accountability and CWG-Stewardship meetings · The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability ( <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CCWG+on+Enhancing+ICANN+A…> CCWG-Accountability) <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52890276> met in Istanbul on 23 and 24 March. There were 57 CCWG participants – 42 onsite and 15 using remote participation tools, three <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Advisors> advisors to the CCWG and two representatives from <http://www.sidley.com/> Sidley Austin, one of the two legal firms engaged by CCWG-Accountability. · <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/CWG+to+Develop+an+IAN…> CWG-Stewardship <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52890325> met on 26 and 27 March, with 43 onsite and remote CWG participants, including 18 who had participated in the CWG-Accountability meeting earlier in the week. Sidley Austin was represented, as they were also engaged to provide legal advice to CWG-Stewardship. · On 25 March, the Co-Chairs of both groups met to discuss the progress, objectives of their work, and how the groups could help inform each other's work. · In addition to the archived notes, transcripts and recordings of both meetings, the Co-Chairs of both groups published Statements regarding the meetings: · <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-03-25-en> CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs' Statement · <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-03-29-en> CWG-Stewardship Co-Chairs' Statement · ICANN published video interviews with <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVof6v0MguE> CCWG Co-Chair, Thomas Rickert, and with the <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1M-ldKSjgM> CWG Co-Chairs. CCWG-Accountability progress in Istanbul ICANN Mission, Vision and Value statement · There was general agreement that ICANN's commitment to its core values, as stated in its <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en> Bylaws, needed strengthening. · There was recognition that after the IANA Stewardship Transition occurs, the accountability and transparency mechanisms provided by the Affirmation of Commitments ( <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/aoc-en> AoC) between ICANN and the U.S. Government should be brought into ICANN's Bylaws. The group discussed the need to rewrite some of the original AoC text, rather than incorporate it as a single unchanged block, noting it would be important to raise community awareness of the rewriting process of this key commitment between ICANN and the global community. Empowering the community · The group discussed new mechanisms to empower the community in ICANN's decision-making processes. In particular, there was general convergence on the need to enable the community to: · Recall (or "spill") ICANN's Board of Directors · Approve or prevent changes to ICANN's Bylaws, Mission and Core Values · Reject Board decisions on ICANN's Strategic Plan and budget (where the Board has failed to appropriately consider community input) · It was recognized that, while it was clearly important that the ICANN Board be accountable to the community, it was also essential for the community itself to meet high standards of accountability. Introducing Fundamental ("Golden") Bylaws · The CCWG-Accountability proposed to introduce Fundamental Bylaws (previously referred to as "Golden" Bylaws), in ICANN's revised Bylaws that would add additional robustness to key provisions. These Fundamental Bylaws should be changeable, but any change should require a very high standard of community approval. · Four key topics were proposed as potential new Fundamental Bylaws: · ICANN's Mission (some provisions also identified for possible elevation to ICANN's <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/articles-en> Articles of Incorporation) · Enhanced Independent Review Process · The power to veto Bylaw changes · New community powers ("Empowering the community" above) Independent Review Process · There was general agreement to <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888740/IRP%20Accountabil…> enhance ICANN's existing Independent Review Process [PDF, 74 KB] rather than create a new process. Possible enhancements include making the process more accessible and affordable and having a standing panel (to help with consistency of decision making) that produces binding outcomes. ICANN's Mission and Core Values would guide the decisions. General discussion · There was debate about the accountability mechanisms to be proposed as Work Stream 1 –ICANN accountability processes that need to be in place or agreed to before the IANAStewardship Transition can occur – and broad agreement to continue developing proposals on six core themes: · Revisions to the mission, commitments and core values · Enhancement of the independent review process · Establishing fundamental bylaws · Mechanisms for community empowerment · Transcription of the AoC provisions and reviews into the Bylaws · Enhancements to reconsideration processes What comes next? · All recommendations by CCWG-Accountability will be subjected to <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/ST-WP+Draft+Documents> stress tests against contingencies already identified by the group. · The CCWG-Accountability will refine its recommendations and expects to put its draft out for public comment within the next few weeks. Based on input from the wider community, the CCWG-Accountability expects to hold further deliberations during ICANN 53. · Given the potential significant impact to ICANN and the global community of the proposals CCWG-Accountability is considering, the group is discussing the need to hold dual public comment processes, to ensure its recommendations are given the broadest consideration by the community. CWG-Stewardship comes closer to converging on a single solution in Istanbul Reducing the possible number of potential structures/models on the table · Entering the meeting, the CWG-Stewardship was considering seven possible models of what a post-NTIA IANA stewardship could look like: two external solutions (Contract Co. and Trust); two internal solutions (Accountability mechanisms and Trust); and three hybrid/integrated models (IANA subsidiary/ "affiliate" of ICANN, IANA shared services agreements and Standalone IANAentity). Following <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52891634/LegalOverview_26M…> preliminary legal advice presented by Sidley Austin [PPTX, 853 KB] and subsequent discussion amongst CWG-Stewardship members of the pros and cons of the different models, there was agreement to actively investigate the following two models: Accountability mechanisms with functional separation and Accountability mechanisms with legal separation (also called the IANA subsidiary or "affiliate" of ICANN). · The remaining five models were not entirely dismissed and could be revived if either or both of the above models prove inadequate. Design Teams · Eight of the proposed fourteen <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Design+Teams> Design Teams had been active before the Istanbul meeting, with a fifteenth, on the IANA budget, being added on the final day of the meeting. The Design Teams reported back to the group on their progress. Detailed information on the Design Teams and their activities can be found in the documents <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52894123> marked "DT." A summary of the status of the Design Teams as of 27 March is available <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894123/CWG_Stewardship_H…> on Slide seven. [PDF, 1.2 MB] What comes next? · Design Teams aim to complete their work by 10 April for review by CWG-Stewardship. Accepted work will be inserted in the appropriate section of the draft names proposal. · CWG-Stewardship has revised its upcoming timeline slightly and extended the Public Comment period for its draft proposal from 21 to 30 days. See "Upcoming Key Dates" below. · Three versions of the group's final proposal will be developed. One version will be submitted to theIANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG) for consideration. A second, more detailed version will explain the reasoning behind choices in the proposal and provide more information about the implementation of the post-NTIA model for the names component of IANA stewardship. A third, short version, produced with the assistance of ICANN communications staff, will be made available as a summary for members of the community not involved with the process on a day-to-day level. Inter-community correspondence · On 19 March, a group of registries <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-March/002385.html> submitted a <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894123/IANA%20Stewardshi…> guidance document [PDF, 99 KB] to CWG-Stewardship aimed at delivering the most minimal, simple and lightweight structures possible while meeting the needs of stakeholders and avoiding the creation of new, unnecessary structures and complexities. · On 22 March, the Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship Proposal ( <https://www.nro.net/news/final-proposal-crisp> CRISP) Team Co-Chairs <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-March/002444.html> requested that the CWG-Stewardship Co-Chairs communicate with them directly and in a timely manner on developments that might affect the Numbers community, and not wait for the final submission of the names proposal to the ICG. · Also on 22 March, the Registries Stakeholder Group ( <http://gnso.icann.org/en/about/stakeholders-constituencies/rysg> RySG) <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-March/002417.html> submitted a <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894123/RySG%20IANA%20Sta…> statement [DOCX, 34 KB] to CWG-Stewardship. Among other issues, the statement recommended: avoid creating new accountability concerns by minimizing the creation of new structures; identifying processes for improvements to the performance of the IANA functions and oversight structures; and identifying stable funding streams for the IANA functions from fees paid to ICANN by gTLDs and ccTLDs. · On 26 March, the Country Code Name Supporting Organization ( <http://ccnso.icann.org/> ccNSO) Council Chairs <http://ccnso.icann.org/about/holland-et-al-to-lise-et-al-26mar15-en.pdf> wrote[PDF, 52 KB] to the CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs to report that theccNSO intended to have the IANA and accountability proposals presented at the next face-to-face meeting of the ccNSO at ICANN 53 in Buenos Aires and, if the ccTLDs present at the meeting express support for the proposals, the ccNSO Council would then make a decision on whether to adopt the proposals. Therefore, the earliest the ccNSO could make a decision is 21-25 June 2015. · On 26 March, a German <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894734/German%20Position…> position paper [PDF, 26 KB] on the IANA Stewardship Transition, developed via a multistakeholder process and backed by the German government, was <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-March/002471.html> sent to the CWG-Stewardship Co-Chairs. Among its recommendations, the paper suggests that there must be binding rules implemented that protect ICANN and the IANA functions from possible threats toICANN's existence (such as insolvency) before the transition occurs. The paper also recommends it should remain possible to separate the technical execution of the IANA functions from ICANN. · On 26 March, the U.S. Government Accountability Office ( <http://www.gao.gov/> GAO) <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2015-March/001…> requested a teleconference with the Co-Chairs of the CCWG-Accountability on 7 or 8 April 2015. GAO is reviewing NTIA's proposed transition of IANA Stewardship in response to a request by the Chairs of the <http://energycommerce.house.gov/> U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its <http://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittees/communications-and-technology> Communications and Technology Subcommittee. Upcoming key dates 31 Mar 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> CCWG-Accountability Meeting #18, 6:00 UTC 2 Apr 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/Meetings> CWG-Stewardship Meeting #33, 17:00-19:00 UTC 7 Apr 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> CCWG-Accountability Meeting #19, 19:00UTC 10 Apr 2015 Deadline for CWG-Stewardship Design Teams to provide content 13-14 Apr 2015 CWG-Stewardship intensive working days 14 Apr 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> CCWG-Accountability Meeting #20, 12:00UTC 20 Apr 2015 Public Comment period for CWG-Stewardship draft proposal begins 21 Apr 2015 <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Meetings> CCWG-Accountability Meeting #21, 6:00UTC 20 May 2015 Public Comment period for CWG-Stewardship draft proposal ends 30 May 2015 CWG-Stewardship High-Intensity Weekend 8 Jun 2015 CWG-Stewardship delivers names proposal to ICANN SOs & ACs 18-19 Jun 2015 ICG Face-to-Face Meeting, <https://buenosaires53.icann.org/> ICANN 53, Buenos Aires 25 Jun 2015 CWG-Stewardship delivers names proposal to <https://www.ianacg.org/> ICG Latest documents and drafts 24 Mar 2015 CWG-Stewardship - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894123/CWG_Stewardship_H…> Overview Handout from Istanbul Face-to-Face meeting [PDF, 1.2 MB] 27 Mar 2015 CCWG-Accountability - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52890082/Sidley%20Prelimin…> Sidley Preliminary Draft Responses to CCWG Legal Sub-team Questionnaire [PDF, 821 KB] CCWG-Accountability - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52890082/Adler%20Colvin%20…> Adler Colvin Preliminary Responses to CCWG Legal Sub-team[PDF, 122 KB] 18 Mar 2015 CWG- Stewardship - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/49351404/CWG%20-%20Draft%2…> Draft Transition Plan V2.2.1 [DOCX, 168 KB] 15 Mar 2015 CWG-Stewardship - <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52894123/Sidley%20Prelimin…> Sidley Preliminary Draft Response to legal questions [PDF, 155 KB] IANA Stewardship Transition in the news 25 Mar 2015 <http://www.insidemarketing.it/temi-importanti-per-proprietari-di-marchi_584…> Temi importanti per i proprietari di marchi, Inside Marketing [IT] 16 Mar 2015 <https://www.nic.ad.jp/ja/governance/iana.html> IANA機能の監督権限の移管について, JPNIC [JP] 9 Mar 2015 <http://www.lesoleil.sn/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45240:m…> Mutations dans la gouvernance de l'internet dans le monde: Les Etats africains invités à faire des propositions, Le Soleil [FR] 8 Mar 2015 <http://www.eeo.com.cn/2015/0308/273340.shtml> "互联网+"：法律政策怎么加？, 经济观察网 [CN] You can play a role in IANA's future… Anyone can participate in discussions about the future of IANA's stewardship and ICANN accountability. For information on joining CWG-Stewardship, contact <mailto:grace.abuhamad@icann.org> grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org. For information on joining CCWG-Accountability, contact <mailto:accountability-staff@icann.org> accountability-staff(a)icann.org. Compiled on behalf of ICANN by Samantha Dickinson | 31 March 2015 This update can also be found here: <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-discussion-2015-03-3…> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-discussion-2015-03-3…

1 0

Document and Motion deadline Monday, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry April 1, 2015

April 1, 2015

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 6 April 2015 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 16 April 2015 at 11:00 UTC. Motions should be sent to the Council mailing list and will then be posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+16+April+20… 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

1 0