May 2015 - council - lists.icann.org

Updated Proposed GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 21 May 2015 at 15:00 UTC.
by Glen de Saint Géry May 13, 2015

May 13, 2015

Dear Councillors, Please find the updated proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting Thursday, 21 May 2015 at 15:00 UTC. The agenda is also posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-21may15-en.htm And on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+21+May+2015 The update relates to the addition of Item 8: UPDATE - Progress of IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms PDP Working Group (10 mins) And in the previous edition the removal of Item 10: UPDATE - Progress of Cross Community Working Group on Framework of Principles for Future Cross Community Working Groups. It is expected that this update will be discussed in Buenos Aires. 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: 15:00 UTC (http://tinyurl.com/nktk6rh) 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 16:00 London; 17:00 Brussels; 23:00 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, 19 March and 16 April 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 (0 mins) Item 4: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (15 mins) The Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (CWG-Stewardship) 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. The CWG-Stewardship has published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-0…> its updated proposal for public comment (ending on 20 May), with the goal of finalizing the proposal for submission to its chartering SO/ACs ahead of the ICANN53 Meeting to be held in Buenos Aires and subsequent submission to the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG). Given that the GNSO is a chartering organization of the CWG-Stewardship and will need to approve the group's final proposal, this is an opportunity for the Council to review the CWG's work and to discuss what, if any, issues will need to be addressed by the GNSO or Council at this critical stage. 4.1 - Status summary (Jonathan Robinson) 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Next steps Item 5: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability - CCWG Accountability (15 mins) In discussions around the IANA stewardship transition, the broader topic of the impact on ICANN's accountability was raised, given ICANN's historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The community concerns indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms do not yet meet some stakeholders' expectations. Considering that the US Government (through the NTIA) has stressed that it expects community consensus on the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations needed to be addressed. This has been done through the formation and development of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability - CCWG Accountability. The CCWG-Accountability developed two work streams, of which Work Stream 1 is intended to align with the timing of the CWG-Transition work and the overall NTIA objectives and timeline. Initial proposals for Work Stream 1 were published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20…> for public comment on 4 May 2015 (closing on 3 June). As the GNSO is a chartering organization of 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, this is an opportunity for the Council to review and discuss the CCWG's work and to discuss what, if any, issues will need to be addressed by the GNSO or Council at this critical stage. 5.1 - Status summary (Thomas Rickert) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Next steps Item 6: UPDATE - Cross Community Working Group on Internet Governance (10 mins) The charter<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888213/Charter%20ccWG%20…> for this CWG was ratified between September 2014 and April 2015 by the ALAC, ccNSO and GNSO, having previously been an informal effort organized by the ALAC and the GNSO's Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group. The GNSO Council does not currently have a Council liaison to the CWG. Separately, the CWG has submitted a recent request to its Chartering Organizations to confirm interpretation of the chartered role of observers/participants in its work. Here the Council will receive an update on the CWG's progress, discuss both the liaison issue, and consider a non-objection to the CWG's proposed interpretation of the Charter. 6.1 - Status summary (Olivier Crépin-Leblond & Rafik Dammak) 6.2 - Consideration of non-objection to Charter interpretation 6.3 - Appointment of Council liaison 6.4 - General discussion and next steps Item 7: UPDATE - Progress of Cross-Community Working Group on Use of Country & Territory Names as TLDs (10 mins) This CWG was jointly chartered<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/48347158/Cross--%25E2%2580…> by the ccNSO and GNSO Councils in June 2014 to review the current status of representations of country and territory names under current ICANN policies, guidelines and procedures, and to provide advice regarding the feasibility of developing a consistent and uniform definitional framework that could be applicable across the respective SO/ACs. Here the Council will receive an update from the CWG co-chairs, and discuss the appointment of a new Council liaison to the CWG. 7.1 - Status<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-cwg-uctn-council-21may…> summary (Heather Forrest & Carlos Raul Gutierrez) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: UPDATE - Progress of IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms PDP Working Group (10 mins) This GNSO PDP Working Group was chartered to explore whether or not amendments to existing curative rights dispute resolution processes or the development of a new and specific procedure would be necessary to address the needs of International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) and International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs). Through the GAC-GNSO liaison, it has sought to engage with the GAC and has also exchanged correspondence with a small representative group of IGOs. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the GAC and IGO engagements, and discuss appropriate next steps for the WG. 8.1 - Status summary (Phil Corwin / Petter Rindforth / Mason Cole) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: UPDATE - Progress of New gTLDs Subsequent Rounds Discussion Group (10 mins) This Discussion Group was created<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201406> by the GNSO Council in June 2014 to discuss experiences gained during the current expansion round of new gTLDs, and identify possible subjects for future Issue Reports that might result in changes to application procedures. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the DG's work, with a view toward possible Council action on its recommendations in Buenos Aires. 9.1 - Status summary (Bret Fausett / Jeff Neuman / Liz Williams) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: UPDATE - GNSO Drafting Team on New ICANN Meeting Strategy (10 mins) Following initial Council discussions on planning GNSO-related meetings at ICANN Public Meetings after implementation of the new ICANN meeting strategy, a Drafting Team comprised of several Council members was created to develop an initial proposal<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gnso-council-proposal-new-meeting-strategy-…> for Council consideration. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the project, and consider next steps. 10.1 - Update (Volker Greimann / Marika Konings) 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: UPDATE - Progress on GNSO Review (10 minutes) The Independent Examiner appointed by the Board's Structural Improvements Committee to conduct the GNSO Review has shared its draft Initial Report with the GNSO's Working Party on this topic. The current intention is to publish the Initial Report for public comment following feedback from the Working Party, prior to the Buenos Aires meeting. Here the Council will receive an update on the Initial Report and proposed timelines for completing the Review. 11.1 - Update (Jennifer Wolfe) 11.2 - Discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: Any Other Business (5 mins) 12.1 - Buenos Aires meeting planning (update: David Cake / Jonathan Robinson) 12.2 - Any other business _____________________________ 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 15:00 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 08:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-5+1DST 10:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+1DST 10:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 11:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 17:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 18:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+3+0DST 18:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 23:00 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+1DST 01:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/nktk6rh 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

Proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on Thursday, 21 May 2015 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry May 13, 2015

May 13, 2015

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on Thursday, 21 May 2015 at 15:00 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: 15:00 UTC (http://tinyurl.com/nktk6rh) 08:00 Los Angeles; 11:00 Washington; 16:00 London; 17:00 Brussels; 23:00 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, 19 March and 16 April 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 (0 mins) Item 4: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (15 mins) The Cross Community Working Group to develop a transition proposal for IANA stewardship on naming related functions (CWG-Stewardship) 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. The CWG-Stewardship has published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-0…> its updated proposal for public comment (ending on 20 May), with the goal of finalizing the proposal for submission to its chartering SO/ACs ahead of the ICANN53 Meeting to be held in Buenos Aires and subsequent submission to the IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG). Given that the GNSO is a chartering organization of the CWG-Stewardship and will need to approve the group's final proposal, this is an opportunity for the Council to review the CWG's work and to discuss what, if any, issues will need to be addressed by the GNSO or Council at this critical stage. 4.1 - Status summary (Jonathan Robinson) 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Next steps Item 5: DISCUSSION - Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability - CCWG Accountability (15 mins) In discussions around the IANA stewardship transition, the broader topic of the impact on ICANN's accountability was raised, given ICANN's historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The community concerns indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms do not yet meet some stakeholders' expectations. Considering that the US Government (through the NTIA) has stressed that it expects community consensus on the transition, this gap between the current situation and stakeholder expectations needed to be addressed. This has been done through the formation and development of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability - CCWG Accountability. The CCWG-Accountability developed two work streams, of which Work Stream 1 is intended to align with the timing of the CWG-Transition work and the overall NTIA objectives and timeline. Initial proposals for Work Stream 1 were published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20…> for public comment on 4 May 2015 (closing on 3 June). As the GNSO is a chartering organization of 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, this is an opportunity for the Council to review and discuss the CCWG's work and to discuss what, if any, issues will need to be addressed by the GNSO or Council at this critical stage. 5.1 - Status summary (Thomas Rickert) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Next steps Item 6: UPDATE - Cross Community Working Group on Internet Governance (10 mins) The charter<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888213/Charter%20ccWG%20…> for this CWG was ratified between September 2014 and April 2015 by the ALAC, ccNSO and GNSO, having previously been an informal effort organized by the ALAC and the GNSO's Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group. The GNSO Council does not currently have a Council liaison to the CWG. Separately, the CWG has submitted a recent request to its Chartering Organizations to confirm interpretation of the chartered role of observers/participants in its work. Here the Council will receive an update on the CWG's progress, discuss both the liaison issue, and consider a non-objection to the CWG's proposed interpretation of the Charter. 6.1 - Status summary (Oliver Crepin-Leblond & Rafik Dammak) 6.2 - Consideration of non-objection to Charter interpretation 6.3 - Appointment of Council liaison 6.4 - General discussion and next steps Item 7: UPDATE - Progress of Cross-Community Working Group on Use of Country & Territory Names as TLDs (10 mins) This CWG was jointly chartered<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/48347158/Cross--%25E2%2580…> by the ccNSO and GNSO Councils in June 2014 to review the current status of representations of country and territory names under current ICANN policies, guidelines and procedures, and to provide advice regarding the feasibility of developing a consistent and uniform definitional framework that could be applicable across the respective SO/ACs. Here the Council will receive an update from the CWG co-chairs, and discuss the appointment of a new Council liaison to the CWG. 7.1 - Status<http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/presentation-cwg-uctn-council-21may…> summary (Heather Forrest & Carlos Raul Gutierrez) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: UPDATE - Progress of New gTLDs Subsequent Rounds Discussion Group (10 mins) This Discussion Group was created<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201406> by the GNSO Council in June 2014 to discuss experiences gained during the current expansion round of new gTLDs, and identify possible subjects for future Issue Reports that might result in changes to application procedures. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the DG's work, with a view toward possible Council action on its recommendations in Buenos Aires. 8.1 - Status summary (Bret Fausett / Jeff Neuman / Liz Williams) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: UPDATE - Progress of Cross Community Working Group on Framework of Principles for Future Cross Community Working Groups (10 mins) The CWG-Principles was jointly chartered<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/30345126/Final%20Approved%…> by the ccNSO and GNSO Councils in March 2014, to build on earlier community work and develop a guiding framework for the initiation, formation, operation and closure of future CWGs. Since the group began its work, the ICANN community has relied ever more on CWGs to address issues of substance across various ICANN SO and ACs. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of work and proposed timelines of this CWG. 9.1 - Status summary (Steve Chan) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: UPDATE - GNSO Drafting Team on New ICANN Meeting Strategy (10 mins) Following initial Council discussions on planning GNSO-related meetings at ICANN Public Meetings after implementation of the new ICANN meeting strategy, a Drafting Team comprised of several Council members was created to develop an initial proposal [INSERT LINK] for Council consideration. Here the Council will receive an update on the status of the project, and consider next steps. 10.1 - Update (Volker Greimann / Marika Konings) 10.2 - Discussion 10.3 - Next steps Item 11: UPDATE - Progress on GNSO Review (10 minutes) The Independent Examiner appointed by the Board's Structural Improvements Committee to conduct the GNSO Review has shared its draft Initial Report with the GNSO's Working Party on this topic. The current intention is to publish the Initial Report for public comment following feedback from the Working Party, prior to the Buenos Aires meeting. Here the Council will receive an update on the Initial Report and proposed timelines for completing the Review. 11.1 - Update (Jennifer Wolfe) 11.2 - Discussion 11.3 - Next steps Item 12: Any Other Business (5 mins) 12.1 - Buenos Aires meeting planning (update: David Cake / Jonathan Robinson) 12.2 - Any other business _____________________________ 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 15:00 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 08:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-5+1DST 10:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+1DST 10:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+1DST 11:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 12:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 16:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 17:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 18:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel.…>) UTC+3+0DST 18:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 23:00 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+1DST 01:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/nktk6rh Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

For your review - draft GNSO schedule for New ICANN Meeting Strategy
by Marika Konings May 11, 2015

May 11, 2015

Dear All, On behalf of the GNSO New ICANN Meeting Strategy Drafting Team, please find a first draft of the outline of the GNSO related meetings under the new ICANN Meeting Strategy which will take effect in 2016. The drafting team would be interested to obtain the input from you and/or your respective groups on this proposed outline via the mailing list and/or during the upcoming GNSO Council meeting so that any further changes can be made before this draft is shared with other SO/ACs ahead of the ICANN meeting in Buenos Aires. As discussed previously, co-ordination with other SO/Acs on the new meeting strategy will be of key importance to avoid potential conflict and/or overlap and as such the drafting team aims to work with the other SO/ACs to co-ordinate the approach for the new ICANN Meeting Strategy in Buenos Aires which is intended to result in a 'final' outline post BA. In the attached document you will find a summary of the main objectives of each of the meetings (A, B and C) as outlined by the ICANN Meeting Strategy Working Group, a high level schedule as prepared by the ICANN Meeting Strategy Working Group complemented by yellow additions that reflect the GNSO related meetings as well as a block schedule that has been prepared by the drafting team to further detail the expected GNSO related meetings. Note that for the B meeting a number of assumptions have been made that are listed on page 4 and 5. As a reminder, the B meeting reflects the biggest departure from the current meeting structure as it is a 4-day meeting focused on outreach and SO/AC work. Best regards, Marika

1 0

Document and Motion deadline Monday, 11 May 2015 at 23:59 UTC for Council meeting 21 May 2015 at 15:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry May 8, 2015

May 8, 2015

Dear Councillors, Reports, motions and documents for consideration are due no later than (NLT) 10 days in advance (i.e. MONDAY, 11 May 2015 at 23:59 UTC) of the GNSO Council meeting on 21 May 2015 at 15:00 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+21+May+2015 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

RE: [council] FW: NomCom appointee skill sets
by Winterfeldt, Brian J. May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

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). ===========================================================

14 28

FW: Request to no-objection on interpretation charter CCWG IG
by Jonathan Robinson May 7, 2015

May 7, 2015

All, Please see below from Rafik. I expect that this is something we can deal with at our enxt GNSO Council meeting. Any concerns? Jonathan From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com] Sent: 27 April 2015 13:35 To: Jonathan Robinson Cc: David Cake; Volker Greimann; Glen de Saint Géry; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Subject: Request to no-objection on interpretation charter CCWG IG Dear Jonathan, In order to complete the transition of the Cross-Community Working Group Internet Governance (CCWG IG) to a fully chartered CCWG, we seek your non objection on an interpretation of the section on observers in the CCWG IG charter to mean: "In addition, the CCWG-IG will be open to any interested person as a participant. Participants may be from a chartering organization, from a stakeholder group not represented in the CCWG-IG, or may be self-appointed. Participants will be able to actively participate in and attend all CCWG-IG meetings, work groups and sub-work groups. However, should there be a need for a consensus call or decision, such consensus call or decision will be limited to CCWG-IG members appointed by the chartering organizations.” If you agree, could be so kind to convey the “no-objection” to us? Olivier Crepin-Leblond (ALAC), and Rafik Dammak (GNSO) Co-Chairs of the CCWG IG Introduction and background. At its meeting in Singapore the cross-community working group on Internet Governance (CCWG IG), discussed how to complete its transition to the formally chartered CCWG as envisioned by the chartering organizations. The main issue that needs to be addressed is dealing with the current status of (former) participants, taking into account the rules of the charter. As you will recall the CCWG IG was originally an informal group, with no charter. Participants of the original group felt it necessary to provide a solid basis for its work and hence developed a charter, which was proposed to all supporting organizations and advisory committees for adoption. As you will know the charter was adopted by the ALAC, ccNSO, GNSO and SSAC in the September/ November 2014 timeframe. Following adoption of the charter some of the chartering organizations appointed members and a co-chair to the CCWG IG as envisioned in the charter, and one (SSAC) although adopting the charter, reclined from its ability to appoint members. The newly appointed SO and AC members included some of the participants of the former, informal Internet Governance community group. To date the SO and AC have not appointed observers as envisioned in the charter. As a result participants now include newly appointed members, and people who have signed-up as participants in the (former) informal Internet Governance group I.e. before it was chartered (see: <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275) In order to avoid to have to go through a formal charter changing process, we seek to achieve an effective change through an agreed interpretation of the term ”observers” in the charter. Current definition of membership. According to the current charter of the CCWG IG membership of the CCWG includes members (appointed by the chartering organisations, according to their own rules and procedures), observers and experts. In this context observers are described as people who:"In addition, all SOs and ACs may appoint Observers if permitted by and in accordance with their own rules and procedures. Such Observers are entitled to participate in WG deliberations on an equal footing with the Members except for formal voting, when called for by the Co-Chairs of the WG. Voting is limited only to Members. The number of Observers appointed by each SO and AC shall not exceed the number of Members appointed by that SO or AC." The proposed changes. In order to complete the transition to the fully chartered CCWG IG, we seek your non objection on an interpretation of the section on observers in the CCWG IG charter to mean: "In addition, the CCWG-IG will be open to any interested person as a participant. Participants may be from a chartering organization, from a stakeholder group not represented in the CCWG-IG, or may be self-appointed. Participants will be able to actively participate in and attend all CCWG-IG meetings, work groups and sub-work groups. However, should there be a need for a consensus call or decision, such consensus call or decision will be limited to CCWG-IG members appointed by the chartering organizations” (which is similar to the language in the charter of the CCWG- Accountability) The major changes would be: · No limit on the number of observers/ participants; · Self-nomination as participant versus appointment by a chartering organization, allowing for broader participation The benefits of this interpretation would be normalization of membership rules across the CCWG and CWGs (best practice) and providing clarity around “legacy” participation. Before the CCWG IG was chartered, community members participated and participate in the activities of this particular CCWG (“legacy” participants). To date these participants have not been appointed by a SO or AC. Experience with the CWG Stewardship and CCWG Accountability has shown that broad participation, with additional obligations and privileges for appointed members, provides a fair and workable basis and at the same time increases transparency, interest in the work, and active participation of the broader community and community members. The drafting team introduced a restrictive membership and participation rule at the time of drafting in response to risks of a WG without charter, un-clarity of representation on the WG and interest WG represents in its public statements. However, with charter in place resulting in a clearly defined role for chartering organizations and members, and the positive experience to date with participants on the CWG Stewardship and CCWG Accountability, a more liberal interpretation of the “observer” rule as described above is advised, as it would increase the value to the community and legitimacy of the CCWG IG.

3 2

GNSO Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues Working Group Initial Report
by Glen de Saint Géry May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en GNSO Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues Working Group Initial Report Follow Updates<https://www.icann.org/users/sign_up?document_id=13453&following=true> Open Date: 5 May 2015 23:59 UTC Close Date: 7 Jul 2015 23:59 UTC Staff Report Due: 21 Jul 2015 23:59 UTC Comments close in 63 Days Contents * Brief Overview<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#brief> * Submit Comment to Forum<mailto:comments-ppsai-initial-05may15@icann.org> * Comments Forum<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ppsai-initial-05may15/> * Section I: Description, Explanation & Purpose<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#section1> * Section II: Background<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#section2> * Section III: Relevant Resources<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#section3> * Section IV: Additional Information<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#section4> * Section V: Reports<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#section5> * Staff Contact<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ppsai-initial-2015-05-05-en#staff_con…> Brief Overview This public comment proceeding is being opened in order to obtain community input on the Initial Report from the GNSO's Policy Development Process Working Group on issues relating to the accreditation of privacy and proxy service providers. ICANN has committed to developing and implementing an accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers. The 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement contains an interim Specification providing for certain minimum requirements relating to the provision of privacy and proxy services. This interim Specification is due to expire on 1 January 2017 or the implementation of ICANN's accreditation program, whichever first occurs. Public comments on the Initial Report may be provided directly to the Public Comment Forum. In case commenters find it more convenient to use a structured format for their responses, a template has also been provided<https://s.zoomerang.com/s/VTLNGF5>. However, comments that do not use the template are also very welcome. Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose This Working Group was tasked to provide the GNSO Council with "policy recommendations regarding the issues identified during the 2013 RAA negotiations, including recommendations made by law enforcement and GNSO working groups, that were not addressed during the 2013 RAA negotiations and otherwise suited for a PDP; specifically, issues relating to the accreditation of Privacy & Proxy Services." The Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) is the contract that governs the relationship between ICANN and its accredited registrars (a directory of accredited registrars can be found at http://www.internic.net/regist.html) Its provisions also may have impacts on registrants and other third parties involved in the domain name system. In June 2013, the ICANN Board approved a new 2013 RAA (the provisions of which can be found at http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/approved-with-specs-27jun1…<https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/approved-with-specs-27jun…> [PDF, 913 KB]). In initiating negotiations for the 2013 RAA with the Registrars Stakeholder Group in October 2011, the ICANN Board had also requested an Issue Report from the GNSO that, upon the conclusion of the RAA negotiations, would start a GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) to address remaining issues not dealt with in the RAA negotiations that would be suited to a PDP. The GNSO Council approved the charter for this effort at its meeting on 31 October 2013 and a Working Group (WG) was formed. The outcome of this PDP will guide ICANN's implementation of the planned accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers, as the current Interim Specification relating to privacy and proxy services in the 2013 RAA is set to expire on 1 January 2017. The WG's charter contains 19 specific questions for the WG, derived from the Staff Paper that was published in September 2013 summarizing the outcome of the 2013 RAA negotiations, and several additional questions covering additional, related topics. The Charter questions cover issues including registration and maintenance of a privacy/proxy service, provider contactability and responsiveness, de-accreditation and topics that have been of longstanding discussion amongst the ICANN community, including provider obligations in relation to "relay" and "reveal" procedures to handle requests for the disclosure of a privacy/proxy customer's identity and contact details. The WG's preliminary recommendations cover all aspects of its Chartered questions, and include specific recommendations concerning "relay and "reveal". Some of these preliminary recommendations cover only certain aspects of a Charter topic, with the WG yet to reach consensus on the remaining aspects and open questions. In some instances, a preliminary recommendation or an open question may include bracketed language indicating alternative versions still under consideration by the WG and for which they would particularly welcome community input. Following analysis of all public comments received, the WG will finalize its recommendations and prepare a Final Report for delivery to the GNSO Council, for its review and action. Section II: Background The Working Group (WG) commenced its work in December 2013 through weekly teleconference meetings, discussions on its mailing list<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/> and face-to-face sessions involving the broader community at ICANN Public Meetings. In addition, the WG was selected by the GNSO Council to participate in a pilot face-to-face full-day session, assisted by a community facilitator, immediately prior to the ICANN Public Meeting in Los Angeles in October 2014. It also received briefings from ICANN's Registrar Services Department and feedback from ICANN's Compliance Department, as well as responses to its solicitations for ICANN community input on its Chartered tasks from the GNSO's Business, Intellectual Property and Internet Service & Connectivity Providers constituencies and the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group, and ICANN's At-Large Advisory Committee. The WG has developed preliminary recommendations for a number of the charter questions it was tasked to address, which are described in its Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.3 MB]. The Initial Report also contains several open questions on which the WG has yet to reach consensus as well as a number of alternative formulations for certain proposals. Community feedback is therefore sought on the preliminary recommendations, open questions and alternative formulations. The WG will review all public comments received as part of its preparations of its Final Report for delivery to and vote by the GNSO Council. Section III: Relevant Resources * Working Group Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.3 MB] * Template for Responses (if desired)<https://s.zoomerang.com/s/VTLNGF5> * Working Group Charter<https://community.icann.org/x/pCifAg> * Working Group wiki space<https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg> Section IV: Additional Information : N/A Section V: Reports Staff Contact : Mary Wong policy-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org> Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

REMINDER: tomorrow! WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment
by Glen de Saint Géry May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-04-28-en WEBINAR: Further Discussion on the CWG-Stewardship 2nd Draft Proposal for Public Comment The Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal for Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) released its 2nd draft proposal for public comment on 22 April<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/cwg-stewardship-draft-proposal-2015-0…>. Following the opening of the public comment proceeding, the CWG-Stewardship Chairs hosted two briefing webinars on 24 April<https://community.icann.org/x/ryYnAw>. The briefing webinars on 24 April focused on the CWG-Stewardship work process, development of the 2nd draft proposal, and provided an overview of the contents and proposed structural model. The CWG-Stewardship Chairs will now host a follow-up series of webinars to brief interested community members on the content of the 2nd draft proposal, and to respond to questions that have surfaced since the briefings on 24 April. These two webinars may help further inform community submissions in time for the close of the public comment period on 20 May. These two webinars will be held at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on: · 6 May from 13:00 - 14:30 UTC (time zone converter here<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) · 7 May from 06:00 - 07:30 UTC (time zone converter here<http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) ________________________________ Webinar Details & How to Attend The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room<https://icann.adobeconnect.com/cwg-iana/>. If you are interested in attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please send an email to brenda.brewer(a)icann.org<mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org> and indicate which time you would like to attend the webinar. Please note that the webinar will be conducted in English and will be recorded and transcribed. Subsequently the transcripts will be translated in the 5 UN languages and posted on the CWG-Stewardship Wiki here<https://community.icann.org/x/V4E0Aw>. ________________________________ Further information For further information about the CWG-Stewardship's work, please seehttps://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg. For further information about the ICG and the IANA Stewardship Transition, please seehttps://www.icann.org/stewardship.

1 0

CCWG report / public comment / webinars
by Thomas Rickert May 5, 2015

May 5, 2015

All, I am pleased to let you know that the first CCWG report on the current status of our work has been published for public comment. As mentioned during previous briefings to the Council, it is most important you communicate this to your respective groups and beyond to encourage feedback. The report does not contain consensus recommendations and for some questions it offers alternative suggestions while indicating which options got most traction in the group so far. Please do make sure you review and let us know whether we are heading in the right direction as we continue to refine our recommendations. In order to be as inclusive as possible, we have developed an engagement plan which includes webinars. You find links to those webinars further down in this e-mail. Also, we have worked on graphics that shall facilitate understanding our recommendations. These can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Draft+Report <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Draft+Report> Please make sure you take a look at them in addition to going through the report. They are fun to read! The report also includes a punchy executive summary for readers that do not want to dive into details of what we did. Thank you for your continued attention to this important subject. Kind regards, Thomas Rickert ___________________________________________________________ Thomas Rickert, Attorney at Law Director Names & Numbers ------------------------------------- eco - Verband der deutschen Internetwirtschaft e.V. Lichtstraße 43h 50825 Köln Fon: +49 (0) 221 - 70 00 48 - 0 Fax: +49 (0) 221 - 70 00 48 - 111 E-Mail: thomas.rickert(a)eco.de Web: http://www.eco.de --------------------------------------------------- eco - Verband der deutschen Internetwirtschaft e.V. Geschäftsführer: Harald A. Summa Vorstand: Prof. Michael Rotert (Vorsitzender), Oliver Süme (stv. Vorsitzender), Klaus Landefeld, Thomas von Bülow, Felix Höger Vereinsregister: Amtsgericht Köln, VR 14478 Sitz des Vereins: Köln > > <http://www.icann.org/>News Alert > > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-05-04-en <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-05-04-en> > Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) - Input Needed on its Proposed Accountability Enhancements (Work Stream 1) > 4 May 2015 > > Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 4 May 2015 > Categories/Tags: > Transparency/Accountability > Reviews/Improvements > IANA Stewardship Transition > Purpose (Brief): > The CCWG-Accountability requests community feedback on the proposed enhancements to ICANN's accountability framework it has identified as essential to happen or be committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition takes place (Work Stream 1). Your input will help the CCWG-Accountability to improve its proposal and carry on with next steps, including Chartering Organizations' endorsement of the CCWG-Accountability output before it is submitted to the ICANN Board. This comment period is an opportunity for you to make your voice heard and to shape the outcome of the CCWG-Accountability work. > > In order to have time to analyze and process community feedback before ICANN53 (21-25 June), and considering the key dependencies Work Stream 1 has with the work related to the IANA Stewardship Transition, the CCWG-Accountability determined that the maximum time that could be allotted to this comment period is 30 days. The CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1 proposals are not final: a second Public Comment period is planned for July, and will be a full 40-day period. Because this (first) Public Comment period is less than the required 40-day minimum, it has been approved by two ICANN Global Leaders. > > Public Comment Box Link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20… <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ccwg-accountability-draft-proposal-20…> > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en> WEBINAR: Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability): Presentation on the Draft Report for Public Comment <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2015-05-04-en#> The Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability was established to initiate a related process to the IANA Stewardship Transition process to ensure that ICANN's accountability and transparency commitments to the global Internet community are maintained and enhanced in the absence of its historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government. This report for public comment represents the current work product of the CCWG-Accountability. It is focused on draft Work Stream 1 recommendations (Work Stream 1 is the CCWG-Accountability's work on changes to ICANN's accountability arrangements which must be in place, or committed to, prior to the IANA Stewardship transition), which were the focus of the first five months of work (from December 2014 until May 2015). These recommendations are not presented as the consensus of the CCWG-Accountability at this point. The CCWG-Accountability is seeking confirmation of its approach and guidance upon several options. The CCWG-Accountability will hold two identical webinars at different times to facilitate participation across time zones. The webinars will take place on: 11 May from 11:00 – 12:30 UTC (time zone converter here <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG-Accountabilit…>) 11 May from 19:00 – 20:30 UTC (time zone converter here <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CCWG-Accountabilit…>)

1 0

Comment on behalf of ICANN GNSO Council
by Jonathan Robinson May 4, 2015

May 4, 2015

Please find the attached comment submitted for and on behalf of the GNSO Council. Thank-you. Jonathan Robinson GNSO Council Chair

4 5