January 2016 - council - lists.icann.org

MP3 recording an & AC Chat transcript GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry 22 Jan '16

22 Jan '16

[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on Thursday, 21 January 2016 http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-21jan16-en.mp3<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=NrFWbrBstcrPWP369qgbqlXiSKeL20xnUXz…> on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jan the Adobe chat transcript can be viewed here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-chat-council-21jan16-en.pdf<http://mailer.samanage.com/wf/click?upn=KTB340yHI8DoUtMP4BGJnjfgjJp6GMAHPLM…> the Council Resolutions are posted on page: gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions Happy listening and reading! Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/> Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Resolutions passed at the GNSO Council meeting on 21 January 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Dear Councillors, Please find the resolutions passed at the GNSO Council meeting on 21 January 2016. The GNSO Council unanimously adopted the Final Report of the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group Voting results<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/voting-ppsai-final-21jan16-en.pdf> Whereas: 1. On 31 October 2013, the GNSO Council chartered a Working Group for a Policy Development Process (PDP) on Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) [see http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201310] and tasked the Working Group to develop policy recommendations to guide ICANN's implementation of an accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers; 2. This PDP has followed the prescribed PDP steps as stated in the Bylaws, resulting in a Final Report delivered to the GNSO Council on 7 December 2015 (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf); 3. The PPSAI PDP Working Group has reached Full Consensus (as described in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines) on all the recommendations in the Final Report; and 4. The GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed these recommendations. Resolved: 1. The GNSO Council adopts, and recommends that the ICANN Board of Directors adopt, all the PPSAI PDP Working Group's final recommendations in the Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf). 2. Should the PDP recommendations be adopted by the ICANN Board, the GNSO Council directs ICANN staff to convene a Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Implementation Review Team. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with assisting ICANN staff in developing the implementation details for the PDP recommendations, evaluating the proposed implementation of the recommendations as approved by the Board, and working with ICANN staff to ensure that the resultant implementation conforms to the intent of the approved recommendations. The Implementation Review Team shall operate in accordance with the Implementation Review Team Principles and Guidance approved by the GNSO Council in June 2015. 3. The GNSO Council requests that, following the adoption by the ICANN Board of the PDP recommendations, ICANN staff issue a call for volunteers for the Implementation Review Team, to be circulated at a minimum to the members of PPSAI PDP Working Group. The GNSO Council unanimously approved the charter for the policy development process (PDP) working group on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Voting results<http://ccnso.icann.org/council/voting-new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-21jan1…> WHEREAS: 1. The GNSO Council has resolved http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201512 to undertake a GNSO policy development process (PDP) to consider and analyze issues discussed in the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures to determine whether changes or adjustments to the existing policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains are needed; and, 2. 2. The GNSO Council has reviewed the draft Working Group Charter embedded in Annex A to the Final Issue Report which was delivered to the GNSO Council on 4 December 2015 and agreed to amend the draft charter to address concerns of potential overlap or duplication with an anticipated PDP on Rights Protection Mechanisms. The final version is available here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-charter-12ja…. RESOLVED: 1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter and appoints Paul McGrady as the GNSO Council liaison to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group (WG); 2. The GNSO Council directs ICANN staff to issue a call for volunteers for the PDP WG no later than seven days after the approval of this motion; and 3. Until such time as the WG selects a chair for the WG and that chair is confirmed by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council liaison to the WG shall serve as the interim chair. 4. Issues relating to RPMs not addressed by the anticipated RPM PDP shall be addressed by this PDP. Please let us 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

CCWG Draft on the screen
by Marika Konings 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

As requested. Marika

1 0

Re: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Hi Phil, Here it is: Please click on the link below to join the GNSO Council Adobe Connect room with sound enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocouncil/ Best regards, Julie From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com> Date: Thursday, January 21, 2016 3:54 PM To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org>, "GNSO Council List (council(a)gnso.icann.org)" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC > What is the Adobe link for this call??? > > > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal > Virtualaw LLC > 1155 F Street, NW > Suite 1050 > Washington, DC 20004 > 202-559-8597/Direct > 202-559-8750/Fax > 202-255-6172/cell > > Twitter: @VlawDC > > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey > > > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On > Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:46 PM > To: GNSO Council List (council(a)gnso.icann.org) > Subject: [council] Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 > January 2016 at 21:00 UTC > > Dear Councillors, > Please find the Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January > 2016 at 21:00 UTC > Also posted on the Wiki at: > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+21+January+2… > and on the website: > http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-21jan16-en.htm > Motions posted on page: > https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+…> 6 > This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating > Procedures, <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> > approved and updated on 24 June 2015. > > 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: 21:00 UTC > http://tinyurl.com/zjkmew8 > > 13:00 Los Angeles; 16:00 Washington; 21:00 London; 23:00 Istanbul; 08:00 > Hobart Friday 22 January > > GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast > To join the event click on the link: http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u > <http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u> > Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be > able to attend and/or need a dial out call. > ___________________________________________ > > Item 1: Administrative matters (5 minutes) > 1.1 Roll call > 1.2 Updates to Statements of Interest > 1.3 Review/amend agenda. > 1.4 Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the > GNSO Operating Procedures: > > Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting of 14 January 2016 will be posted as > approved on xxxxx 2016 > > Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes) > 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> > Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) > > Item 4: VOTE ON MOTION Charter for Policy Development Process (PDP) Working > Group on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures (15 minutes) > In June 2015, the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report to analyze subjects > that may lead to changes or adjustments for subsequent New gTLD procedures, > including any modifications that may be needed to the GNSO¹s policy principles > and recommendations from its 2007 Final Report on the Introduction of New > Generic Top Level Domains > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm> . > Preparation of the Preliminary Issue Report was based on a set of deliverables > from the GNSO¹s New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2015/non-pdp-new-gtld> > (DG) as the basis for analysis. The Preliminary Issue Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-prelim-issu… > 31aug15-en.pdf> was published for public comment on 31 August 2015, and the > comment period closed on 30 October as a result of a request by the GNSO > Council to extend the usual 40-day comment period. The Final Issue Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue… > 4dec15-en.pdf> was submitted to the GNSO Council on 4 December 2015. During > its meeting on 17 December, the Council initiated the PDP but deferred > consideration of the Charter for the PDP Working Group to this meeting. Here > the Council will review the revised charter > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-charter-12ja… > 6-en.pdf> for adoption. > 4.1 Presentation of the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+… > 16> (Donna Austin) > 4.2 Discussion > 4.3 Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than > one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) > > Item 5: VOTE ON MOTION Adoption of Final Report from the Privacy & Proxy > Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group (20 minutes) > This PDP had been requested > <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm#7> > by the ICANN Board when initiating negotiations with the Registrar Stakeholder > Group in October 2011 for a new form of Registrar Accreditation Agreement > (RAA). The 2013 RAA was approved > <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-27jun13-en.htm> by > the ICANN Board in June 2013, at which time the accreditation of privacy and > proxy services was identified as the remaining issue not dealt with in the > negotiations or in other policy activities, and that was suited for a PDP. In > October 2013, the GNSO Council chartered > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/raa-pp-charter-22oct13-en.pdf> the Privacy & > Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group to develop policy > recommendations intended to guide ICANN¹s implementation of the planned > accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers. The PDP Working > Group published its Initial Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf> for public > comment in May 2015, and delivered its Final Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf> to the GNSO > Council on 7 December 2015. Consideration of this item was deferred from the > 17 December meeting. Here the Council will review the Working Group¹s Final > Report, and vote on whether to adopt the consensus recommendations contained > in it. > 5.1 Presentation of the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+… > 16> (James Bladel) > 5.2 Discussion > 5.3 Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than > two-thirds (2/3) of each House or more than three-fourths (3/4) of one House > and one-half (1/2) of the other House) > Item 6: Vote on motion:Initiation of Policy Development Process (PDP) to > review all RPMs in all gTLDs for (20 minutes) > In December 2011 the GNSO Council requested a new Issue Report on the current > state of all rights protection mechanisms implemented for both existing and > new gTLDs, including but not limited to, the UDRP and URS. The Final Issue > Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures was published on 11 January 2015 at > http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/rpm. The Final Issue Report > recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a two-phased Policy Development > Process (PDP) in order to the review Rights Protection Mechanisms in the new > gTLDs and, in a subsequent, second phase, review the Uniform Dispute > Resolution Policy (UDRP), and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the > review topics are properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and > within the scope of the GNSO. Here the Council will review the report, > including the draft Charter setting out the proposed scope of the PDP, and > vote on whether to initiate the PDP and adopt the Charter. > 6.1 Presentation of the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+… > 16> (Amr Elsadr) > 6.2 Discussion > 6.3 Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than > one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) > ITEM 7: UPDATE & Discussion GNSO Review (15 minutes) > As part of ICANN's Bylaws-mandated periodic review of its structures, the > ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee appointed Westlake Governance > as the independent examiner to conduct the current review of the performance > and operations of the GNSO. A GNSO Working Party, chaired by former Councillor > Jennifer Wolfe and comprising representatives of all the GNSO's Stakeholder > Groups and Constituencies, was formed to consult with Westlake over the design > and conduct of the review. Westlake's Draft Report was published > <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> for > public comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from the > GNSO Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report > <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf> > on 15 September. The Working Party has been reviewing the recommendations to > develop guidance for the GNSO Council and ICANN Board¹s consideration in > relation to the implementability and priority of these recommendations. Here > the Council will receive an update from the Review Working Party and discuss > next steps. > 7.1 Update (Jen Wolfe) > 7.2 Discussion > 7.3 Next steps > Item 8: UPDATE & Discussion Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing > ICANN Accountability (10 minutes) > In the course of discussions over the IANA stewardship transition, the > community had raised concerns about ICANN's accountability, given ICANN¹s > historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The > community discussions indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms > do not yet meet some stakeholders¹ expectations. As that the U.S. government > (through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration > (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 resulted in the creation > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en… > df> of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability > (CCWG-Accountability <https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg> ) of which the > GNSO is a chartering organization. > The CCWG-Accountability¹s Third Draft Proposal was published > <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-20… > -11-30-en> for public comment on 30 November 2015. The GNSO Council discussed > input to this proposal during its meeting on 14 January 2016. Here the Council > will receive an update on the progress of the CCWG -Accountability, > specifically the timeline and consideration of input provided by the GNSO > Council and its SG/Cs. > 8.1 Update (Thomas Rickert) > 8.2 Discussion > 8.3 Next steps > Item 9: UPDATE & Discussion Marrakesh Meeting Planning (10 minutes) > During the Dublin meeting, Susan Kawaguchi and Amr Elsadr volunteered to work > with the GNSO Council Leadership on the development of the proposed agenda for > the GNSO Weekend Session in Marrakech. Here the Council will receive a status > update on the planning for Marrakesh and any action that may be required from > the GNSO Council. > 9.1 Status update (Susan Kawaguchi / Amr Elsadr) > 9.2 Discussion > 9.3 Next steps > Item 10:Any Other Business (10 Minutes) > _________________________________ > Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section > 3) > 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO > Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or > other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting > thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: > a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than > one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. > b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in > Annex A <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> ): requires > an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than > two-thirds (2/3) of one House. > c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO > Supermajority. > d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative > vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) > of one House. > e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an > affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. > f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved > under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter > through a simple majority vote of each House. > g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final > Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon > a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. > h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an > affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one > GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups > supports the Recommendation. > i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an > affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, > j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain > Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a > two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the > GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded. > k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the > ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the > GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. > l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council > members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority > of the other House." > > Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4 > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf> ) > 4.4.1 Applicability > Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council > motions or measures. > a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); > b. Approve a PDP recommendation; > c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN > Bylaws; > d. Fill a Council position open for election. > 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced > time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In > exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may > reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided > such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. > 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee > votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for > transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting > by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may > become available. > 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a > quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) > Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00 > Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > California, USA (PDT > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html> ) > UTC-7+1DST 13:00 > San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 15:00 > Iowa City, USA (CDT <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00> ) > UTC-6+0DST 15:00 > New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00 > Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html> ) > UTC-3+0DST 18:00 > Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+0DST 19:00 > London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 21:00 > Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 > Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 23:00 > Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 23:00 > Perth, Australia (WST > <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> ) > UTC+8+1DST 05:00 next day > Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 05:00 next day > Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 08:00 next day > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2016, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with > exceptions) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com <http://www.timeanddate.com/> > http://tinyurl.com/ha4rugt > > Please let me know if you have any questions. > Thank you. > Kind regards, > Glen > > Glen de Saint Géry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> > http://gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> > > > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> > Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16 > Internal Virus Database is out of date.

1 0

Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
by Glen de Saint Géry 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Dear Councillors, Please find the Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC Also posted on the Wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+21+January+2… and on the website: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-21jan16-en.htm Motions posted on page: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+… This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures,<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> approved and updated on 24 June 2015. 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: 21:00 UTC http://tinyurl.com/zjkmew8 13:00 Los Angeles; 16:00 Washington; 21:00 London; 23:00 Istanbul; 08:00 Hobart Friday 22 January 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 they will not be able to attend and/or need a dial out call. ___________________________________________ Item 1: Administrative matters (5 minutes) 1.1 - Roll call 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest 1.3 - Review/amend agenda. 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting of 14 January 2016 will be posted as approved on xxxxx 2016 Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes) 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> Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) Item 4: VOTE ON MOTION - Charter for Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures (15 minutes) In June 2015, the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report to analyze subjects that may lead to changes or adjustments for subsequent New gTLD procedures, including any modifications that may be needed to the GNSO's policy principles and recommendations from its 2007 Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top Level Domains<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm>. Preparation of the Preliminary Issue Report was based on a set of deliverables from the GNSO's New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2015/non-pdp-new-gtld> (DG) as the basis for analysis. The Preliminary Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-prelim-issu…> was published for public comment on 31 August 2015, and the comment period closed on 30 October as a result of a request by the GNSO Council to extend the usual 40-day comment period. The Final Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue…> was submitted to the GNSO Council on 4 December 2015. During its meeting on 17 December, the Council initiated the PDP but deferred consideration of the Charter for the PDP Working Group to this meeting. Here the Council will review the revised charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-charter-12ja…> for adoption. 4.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+…> (Donna Austin) 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) Item 5: VOTE ON MOTION - Adoption of Final Report from the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group (20 minutes) This PDP had been requested<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm#7> by the ICANN Board when initiating negotiations with the Registrar Stakeholder Group in October 2011 for a new form of Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). The 2013 RAA was approved<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-27jun13-en.htm> by the ICANN Board in June 2013, at which time the accreditation of privacy and proxy services was identified as the remaining issue not dealt with in the negotiations or in other policy activities, and that was suited for a PDP. In October 2013, the GNSO Council chartered<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/raa-pp-charter-22oct13-en.pdf> the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group to develop policy recommendations intended to guide ICANN's implementation of the planned accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers. The PDP Working Group published its Initial Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf> for public comment in May 2015, and delivered its Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf> to the GNSO Council on 7 December 2015. Consideration of this item was deferred from the 17 December meeting. Here the Council will review the Working Group's Final Report, and vote on whether to adopt the consensus recommendations contained in it. 5.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+…> (James Bladel) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of each House or more than three-fourths (3/4) of one House and one-half (1/2) of the other House) Item 6: Vote on motion: Initiation of Policy Development Process (PDP) to review all RPMs in all gTLDs for (20 minutes) In December 2011 the GNSO Council requested a new Issue Report on the current state of all rights protection mechanisms implemented for both existing and new gTLDs, including but not limited to, the UDRP and URS. The Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures was published on 11 January 2015 at http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/rpm. The Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a two-phased Policy Development Process (PDP) in order to the review Rights Protection Mechanisms in the new gTLDs and, in a subsequent, second phase, review the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the review topics are properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope of the GNSO. Here the Council will review the report, including the draft Charter setting out the proposed scope of the PDP, and vote on whether to initiate the PDP and adopt the Charter. 6.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+…> (Amr Elsadr) 6.2 - Discussion 6.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) ITEM 7: UPDATE & Discussion - GNSO Review (15 minutes) As part of ICANN's Bylaws-mandated periodic review of its structures, the ICANN Board's Structural Improvements Committee appointed Westlake Governance as the independent examiner to conduct the current review of the performance and operations of the GNSO. A GNSO Working Party, chaired by former Councillor Jennifer Wolfe and comprising representatives of all the GNSO's Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, was formed to consult with Westlake over the design and conduct of the review. Westlake's Draft Report was published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> for public comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from the GNSO Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf> on 15 September. The Working Party has been reviewing the recommendations to develop guidance for the GNSO Council and ICANN Board's consideration in relation to the implementability and priority of these recommendations. Here the Council will receive an update from the Review Working Party and discuss next steps. 7.1 - Update (Jen Wolfe) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: UPDATE & Discussion - Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (10 minutes) In the course of discussions over the IANA stewardship transition, the community had raised concerns about ICANN's accountability, given ICANN's historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The community discussions indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms do not yet meet some stakeholders' expectations. As that the U.S. government (through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (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 resulted in the creation<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en…> of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability<https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg>) of which the GNSO is a chartering organization. The CCWG-Accountability's Third Draft Proposal was published<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-20…> for public comment on 30 November 2015. The GNSO Council discussed input to this proposal during its meeting on 14 January 2016. Here the Council will receive an update on the progress of the CCWG -Accountability, specifically the timeline and consideration of input provided by the GNSO Council and its SG/Cs. 8.1 - Update (Thomas Rickert) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: UPDATE & Discussion - Marrakesh Meeting Planning (10 minutes) During the Dublin meeting, Susan Kawaguchi and Amr Elsadr volunteered to work with the GNSO Council Leadership on the development of the proposed agenda for the GNSO Weekend Session in Marrakech. Here the Council will receive a status update on the planning for Marrakesh and any action that may be required from the GNSO Council. 9.1 - Status update (Susan Kawaguchi / Amr Elsadr) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: Any Other Business (10 Minutes) _________________________________ Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3) 9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions: a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House. b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A<http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA>): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority. d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House. e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority. f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House. g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination. h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation. i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority, j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded. k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote. l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House." Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4<http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf>) 4.4.1 Applicability Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures. a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP); b. Approve a PDP recommendation; c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws; d. Fill a Council position open for election. 4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present. 4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available. 4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.) Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00 Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html>) UTC-7+1DST 13:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 15:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-6+0DST 15:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 18:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+0DST 19:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 21:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 22:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 23:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 23:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+1DST 05:00 next day Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 05:00 next day Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 08:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2016, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com<http://www.timeanddate.com/> http://tinyurl.com/ha4rugt Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

2 3

Amendment to motion on the Approval of a charter for the PDP WG on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
by Austin, Donna 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

All Apologies for the lateness of this change, but felt it best to provide it to Council prior to the call rather than during. A change is suggested to the second whereas clause to reflect that the draft charter contained in the Final Issue Report was amended to address concerns of overlap or duplication with the anticipated PDP on RPMs. I hope this is an acceptable change. __ 2. Motion on the Approval of a charter for the PDP working group on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Made by: Donna Austin Seconded by: Valerie Tan WHEREAS: 1. The GNSO Council has resolved http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201512 to undertake a GNSO policy development process (PDP) to consider and analyze issues discussed in the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures to determine whether changes or adjustments to the existing policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains are needed; and, 2. The GNSO Council has reviewed the draft Working Group Charter embedded in Annex A to the Final Issue Report which was delivered to the GNSO Council on 4 December 2015 and agreed to amend the draft charter to address concerns of potential overlap or duplication with an anticipated PDP on Rights Protection Mechanisms. The final version is available here: http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-charter-12ja…. RESOLVED: 1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter and appoints Paul McGrady as the GNSO Council liaison to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group (WG); 2. The GNSO Council directs ICANN staff to issue a call for volunteers for the PDP WG no later than seven days after the approval of this motion; and 3. Until such time as the WG selects a chair for the WG and that chair is confirmed by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council liaison to the WG shall serve as the interim chair. __ Donna Austin: Neustar, Inc. Policy and Industry Affairs Manager Cell: +1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin(a)neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin@neustar.biz> ________________________________ The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately and delete the original message. Follow Neustar: [cid:image001.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0] Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc> [cid:image002.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0] LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349> [cid:image003.png@01CC3CD3.5F595DC0] Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

1 0

Proposed Edit to Council Letter to CCWG-ACCT
by Phil Corwin 21 Jan '16

21 Jan '16

Fellow Councilors: I want to suggest a potential edit to our Council letter. Right now it reads: We expect that the CCWG-Accountability develop a Supplemental Proposal based on the input from its Chartering Organizations and the public, the GNSO Council expects also that it and other Chartering Organizations, as well as the larger community, will have an adequate opportunity to review and comment on the Proposal in a timely fashion. My suggested revision would have it read as follows: We expect that the CCWG-Accountability develop a Supplemental Proposal based on the input from its Chartering Organizations and the public, the GNSO Council expects also that it and other Chartering Organizations, reflecting the larger community, will have an adequate opportunity to review and comment on the Supplemental Proposal in a timely fashion. (changes in Bold) As the sentence notes via its reference "and the public", we have already had a public comment period on the Third Proposal. The draft language could be read to suggest that we favor another round of public comment on the anticipated Supplemental Proposal, which could prevent NTIA from receiving the Proposal in the timely manner required (delivery by mid-to-late February) that provides a substantial likelihood of completing the transition in 2016. The proposed revision emphasizes that the Chartering organizations, including the GNSO, are the proper entities to submit any additional comments on the Supplemental Proposal and can transmit the views of their constituents. I realize that some Councilors may wish to have the Supplemental Proposal subject to another round of public comment. If there is a consensus for that position then I would suggest that any such comment period be limited in duration to reflect the fact that the narrow subject of such comments would be those changes made from the Third draft in response to the recent comment period. In any event, I believe our letter should be more clear than the present draft regarding the Council's position in regard to whether an additional round of public - as opposed to Chartering Organization - comment is desired on the Supplemental Proposal we expect to see shortly. Best to all, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

8 21

Updated Project List for review
by Glen de Saint Géry 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the updated Project List, both clean and redline versions for your review. If there are no comments, this list will be posted on the website on page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project and can be directly viewed at http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/projects-list.pdf Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/>

1 0

Letter and updated response to the CCWG-Accountability
by Mary Wong 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

Dear Councilors, Please find attached a draft letter and attachment, intended to be sent by James, Donna and Heather on behalf of the Council to the CCWG-Accountability. As agreed on the Council call of 14 January, a small group of Councilors (James, Paul and Ed) worked with staff to draft a letter with an updated Council response to each of the recommendations in the CCWG-Accountability’s Third Draft Proposal. The updated response (attached in both redlined and clean format) is an attempt to capture all the suggestions and points of agreement that were reached during the 14 January call. Thanks to James, Ed and Paul, it would seem that the most difficult and contentious of the issues brought up on that call may be addressed by the new language that you will see in the document. We hope that this updated response and the proposed letter achieves the Council’s objectives and captures its views as expressed in the discussions to date. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org Telephone: +1-603-5744889

2 2

Withdrawing the Motion to Adopt the Final Issue Report on a PDP to Review all RPMs in all gTLDs
by Amr Elsadr 20 Jan '16

20 Jan '16

Hi, As you may have guessed from the subject line of this email, I am formally withdrawing the motion I submitted on January 11th to adopt the final issues report on the RPMs Review PDP. There are several reasons why I believe this to be a desirable course of action. If you recall, when I submitted this motion, I hadn’t actually read the final issue report yet. Since reading it, I’ve been considering a withdrawal, but needed to wait to consult with the NCSG first. I did this by reaching out to members of the NCSG immediately following the submission of the motion as well as discussing the report and draft charter during yesterday's monthly NCSG policy call. First, I agree with Phil’s earlier email; that loading tomorrow’s Council call with the GNSO’s letter to the CCWG, and three motions on the PPSAI PDP WG’s final report, new gTLDs subsequent rounds PDP WG charter and the PDP to review all RPMs for all gTLDs is a bit much. More importantly, since reading the final issues report, I believe that the report and draft charter need some work done on them before they should be considered by the Council for a formal vote. Since I have withdrawn the motion, I suggest we include this report as a discussion item for tomorrow’s call instead of a vote. I would also be very grateful to see a staff report on the public comment period following publication of the preliminary issue report for this PDP and/or the public comment tool used to review the comments submitted. I’m not sure if these have been previously circulated, or not. If they have, then I missed them and I apologise. If they haven’t, it would be very helpful to take a look at those, preferably before tomorrow’s call. Thanks. Amr

3 2