October 2016 - council - lists.icann.org

REVIEW: Draft Council teleconference minutes 29 September 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 7, 2016

Oct. 7, 2016

Dear Councillors, Attached, for your review, please find the draft minutes of the Council teleconference held on 29 September 2016. If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the website as approved, according to the GNSO Rules of Procedure<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-01sep16-en.pdf> section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 17 October 2016. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

1 0

Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 29 September 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 7, 2016

Oct. 7, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find the action items, and their current status, from the Council meeting held on 29 September 2016. Action Items from the GNSO Council Meeting of 29 September 2016 Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - GNSO Validation of the FY17 Budget and Cost-Control Processes for the CCWG-Accountability Voting results: * Motion passed unanimously Action items: * GNSO Secretariat to communicate voting result to the CCWG-Accountability chairs and the ICANN CFO (COMPLETED) Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Adoption of Implementation Advisory Group Recommendations to Update Procedure on WHOIS Conflicts with National Laws Voting results: * Motion withdrawn; to be resubmitted for Council consideration at ICANN57 in Hyderabad, with potential modifications following additional discussions Action items: * Discussions to continue with Stephanie and other interested Councilors as well as affected parties (e.g. Registries, Registrars) to discuss path forward and rework motion language Item 6: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of Appointment of an Interim GNSO Representative to the Empowered Community Administration Voting results: * Motion passed, with 2 abstentions (Heather Forrest, IPC; Paul McGrady, IPC - reasons for abstention stated during the meeting and will be reflected in the meeting minutes) Action items: * GNSO Secretariat to communicate voting result to the ICANN Secretary (this notice will serve as the required written certification from the GNSO Chair designating the individual who shall represent the Decisional Participant on the EC Administration) (COMPLETED) * GNSO Bylaws Drafting Team (DT) to continue with work on report to the Council; goal to complete report within the next two weeks (IN PROCESS) * Three months after completion and adoption of DT report, GNSO to finalize decision on appointment of GNSO representative to the EC Administration Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Proposed Draft Charter for a New Cross Community Working Group concerning Auction Proceeds from the 2012 New gTLD Program Action items: * Council to continue discussion, including on mailing list, with a view toward considering adoption of a finalized Charter at ICANN57 in Hyderabad Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ICANN Board Letter on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Action items: * Staff to convene volunteer group (comprising Councilors and interested community members) to synthesize coordinated response to the Board, based on WG & SG/C responses received (In progress) * Volunteer group to present proposed response to Council for adoption on 13 October, with goal to transmit response to Board before ICANN57 in Hyderabad · Volunteers so far - Carlos Raúl Gutierrez, Phil Corwin, Keith Drazek, James Bladel, Stefania Milan Item 9: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Proposed Final Framework for Future Cross Community Working Groups Action items: * Deferred to 13 October Council meeting * Staff to circulate Final Framework to Council list for discussion Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Meeting Schedule for ICANN57 Action items: * Councilors to review latest agenda when that is made available by the ICANN Meetings Team * Councilors to coordinate with their respective SG/Cs on feedback, especially on proposed arrangements for Constituency Day * Councilors to confirm attendance in Hyderabad, including for GNSO Council Development Session * Councilors and GNSO community members who are having problems with visas to contact Glen for information about assistance available Item 11: Any Other Business (5 minutes) 11.1 - Staff to follow up on call for volunteers for the GNSO Review Working Group with SG/Cs who have not yet provided their primary and/or alternate members (COMPLETED) 11.2 - Councilors to report any concerns/objections with the GNSO signing-on to the CWG-Stewardship letter within the next 24 hours (Friday 30 September); if none are received, staff will proceed to notify the CWG-Stewardship co-chairs of GNSO sign-on (COMPLETED) 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<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

1 0

Re: [council] FW: Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group"
by James M. Bladel Oct. 7, 2016

Oct. 7, 2016

Phil – Thank you for the quick turn on this analysis. Councilors – Recognizing that this proposal came after our agenda deadline, but please try to review it if you have a chance before our next call. If possible, we will add it as a discussion item under AOB. Thank you, J. From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Phil Corwin <psc(a)vlaw-dc.com> Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 17:20 To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] FW: Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group" Fellow Councilors: As Co-Chair of the Working Group reviewing Curative Rights Processes (CRP) for International Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), I feel it incumbent to provide my initial reaction to this Board letter. In doing so I note that transmission of the letter has been delayed until after the completion of the IANA transition, and that the post-transition role of governments within ICANN was a central controversy surrounding the transition. The CRP WG has labored for the last two years to develop a report and recommendations that are objective and based in fact and relevant law. In order to assure that our conclusions were sound, we suspended our work for nearly one year in order to locate and secure the services of a legal expert on the central subject of the generally recognized scope of IGO sovereign immunity. During this period we continually urged members of the GAC, and IGOs, to participate in our WG. That participation was so sporadic that it amounted to a near-boycott, and when IGO representatives did provide any input they stressed that they were speaking solely as individuals and were not providing the official views of the organizations that employed them. Of course, why should they participate in the GNSO policy processes when they are permitted to pursue their goals in extended closed door discussions with the Board, and when the Board seeks no input from the GNSO in the course of those talks? Turning to the relevant substance of the Board letter and the attached IGO “Small Group” Proposal, I note that this Proposal statement is demonstrably incorrect— The IGO-GAC-NGPC small group that has been discussing the topic of appropriate IGO protections, based on the NGPC’s initial proposal of March 2014, agree that the following general principles should underpin the framework for any permanent solution concerning the protection of IGO names and acronyms in the domain name system: (1) The basis for protection of IGO acronyms should not be founded in trademark law, as IGOs are created by governments under international law and are in an objectively different category of rights-holders; (Emphasis added) In fact, our WG found that many IGOs have trademarked their organizational names and acronyms and have successfully utilized the UDRP. Further, and more relevant, Article 6ter of the Paris Convention provides IGOs with protection of their names and acronyms within the trademark law systems of all Convention signatories, as well as all members of the World Trade Organization, with such protection available through a simple registration procedure with WIPO. So, contrary to the statement quoted above, the basis for IGO acronym protections has already been linked to trademark law. Turning to the relevant portion of the IGO Proposal--- 2. Dispute Resolution Mechanism • ICANN will facilitate the development of rules and procedures for a separate(i.e., separate from the existing UDRP) dispute resolution mechanism to resolve claims of abuse of domain names that are registered and being used in situations where the registrant is pretending to be the IGO or that are otherwise likely to result in fraud or deception, and (a) are identical to an IGO acronym; (b) are confusingly similar to an IGO acronym; or (c) contain the IGO acronym. • Decisions resulting from this mechanism shall be “appealable” through an arbitral process to be agreed. --While our WG is in the process of vetting our preliminary report and recommendations, because it has operated transparently it is no secret that it has decided against creation of a new DRP for the sole and exclusive use of IGOs because there is no demonstrated need to do so. Further, as regards availability of arbitration for appeals from initial CRP decisions, while that matter is still being finalized by the WG, to the extent it is premised upon broad claims of IGO sovereign immunity such claims are not generally supported by existing legal views according to the report received from our retained expert on international law. Here are some other preliminary observations: · The timing of this letter, and the specific DRP recommendations contained in the attached Proposal, are likely to complicate final agreement within the WG on our preliminary report and recommendations. IGOs, having chosen not to meaningfully participate in the WG, are now disrupting its final stage. · It appears that the proposal we have just received has not been endorsed by the Board, but is simply the IGO small group’s “consensus on a proposal for a number of general principles and suggestions that it hopes will be acceptable to the GAC and the GNSO”. Although these IGOs have not meaningfully participated in our WG, they are known to have monitored our work closely enough that they surely know that these proposals stand in stark opposition to the WG’s preliminary conclusions. Finally, in regard to this statement in the Board letter— The Board’s understanding is that those aspects of the proposal that concern curative rights protection may be referred by the GNSO Council to the GNSO’s Working Group that is conducting the ongoing Policy Development Process (PDP) on IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms. We understand further that the Working Group is currently discussing preliminary recommendations that it intends to publish for public comment soon, in the form of an Initial Report. We therefore hope that the presentation of the attached proposal is timely, and will be fully considered by the Working Group regarding the specific topic of enabling adequate curative rights protections for IGO acronyms, and in conjunction with the GNSO Council’s management of the overall process for possible reconciliation of GNSO policy with GAC advice. We also acknowledge, in line with prior correspondence between the Board’s New gTLD Program Committee and the GNSO Council, that the Board will not take action with respect to GAC advice on curative rights protections for IGOs prior to the conclusion of the GNSO’s PDP. - I appreciate the Board’s assurance that it will take no action with respect to GAC advice on CRP for IGOs until the current PDP is concluded. I further note that ICANN staff has already transmitted the Board letter and attached IGO Proposal to all members of the CRP WG and, following consultation with my Co-Chair, it will likely be the main topic of discussion at the WG’s next meeting on October 13th. I can assure you that the Proposal will be fully considered by the WG. However, given the fact that the Proposal is at nearly complete odds with the WG’s preliminary conclusions, and that the IGOs chose not to participate in the WG in any significant way and thereby take advantage of the opportunity to make their case to those community volunteers who have labored in good faith on this project for more than two years, it is most unlikely that the WG will now abandon its own conclusions and adopt those of the IGOs. The Board letter closes with the observation that it wants to “ reiterate our belief that the most appropriate approach for the Board in this matter is to help to facilitate a procedural way forward for the reconciliation of GAC advice and GNSO policy prior to the Board formally considering substantive policy recommendations”. With all respect, what has occurred seems a thoroughly inappropriate approach for reconciling GAC advice and GNSO policy. This Council has undertaken extraordinary steps to conduct outreach to the GAC and to strive to integrate it within the GNSO policy development process, and much of that progress is at risk of being undone by how this matter is ultimately decided. What is at stake in this matter goes far beyond the relatively rare instance in which a domain registrant infringes upon the name or acronym of an IGO and the IGO seeks relief through a CRP. The larger issue is whether, in a post-transition ICANN, the GAC and the UN agencies that comprise a large portion of IGOs, will participate meaningfully in GNSO policy activities, or will seek their policy aims by bypassing the ICANN community and engaging in direct, closed door discussions with the Board. Therefore, how the GNSO and the Board ultimately resolve this matter will have implications far beyond the narrow issue of available CRPs for IGOs. If IGOs are successful in attaining their policy aims through the course of action they have pursued it will send a most unfortunate message that will be detrimental to the functioning of an ICANN in which community members representing business, technology, and civil society are supposed to have the lead role in setting policy, and in which governments are supposed to have a secondary, advisory role. Sincerely, Philip S. Corwin 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 Mary Wong Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 5:03 PM To: GNSO Council List Cc: Steve Crocker; Chris Disspain; bruce.tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au; Markus Kummer; Becky Burr; board-ops-team(a)icann.org Subject: [council] Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group" Dear Councilors, Please find attached the ICANN Board’s reply to the GNSO Council’s letter of 31 May 2016 on the topic of protections for IGOs and the Red Cross. The letter also includes the final proposal on IGO acronyms protection that was worked on by the IGO “small group” of IGO, Board and GAC representatives, facilitated by ICANN staff as appropriate. We will also transmit a copy of this to the co-chairs of the GNSO IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protections PDP Working Group and the GAC. Best regards, Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org> Telephone: +1-603-5744889 ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4656/13157 - Release Date: 10/06/16

3 3

Board reply letter on IGO/RC issues and proposal on IGO acronyms protection from the IGO "small group"
by Mary Wong Oct. 6, 2016

Oct. 6, 2016

Dear Councilors, Please find attached the ICANN Board’s reply to the GNSO Council’s letter of 31 May 2016 on the topic of protections for IGOs and the Red Cross. The letter also includes the final proposal on IGO acronyms protection that was worked on by the IGO “small group” of IGO, Board and GAC representatives, facilitated by ICANN staff as appropriate. We will also transmit a copy of this to the co-chairs of the GNSO IGO-INGO Curative Rights Protections PDP Working Group and the GAC. Best regards, 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

REVIEW: Draft minutes Council teleconference 1 September 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 6, 2016

Oct. 6, 2016

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the draft minutes of the Council teleconference held on 1 September 2016 for your review. If there are no comments, these minutes will be published on the website as approved, according to the GNSO Rules of Procedure <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> section 3.5 "If no objections are received within 10 days, the minutes will be deemed to have been approved for posting" on 15 October 2016. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org<http://gnso.icann.org/> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>.

1 0

Report on GNSO Newcomer Tools Survey
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 6, 2016

Oct. 6, 2016

Dear Council members At your request staff have conducted a survey relating to newcomer tools and prepared the attached report. It is likely that some time will be reserved during the upcoming Council meeting to obtain your input on the proposed improvements and to answer any questions that Council members may have. Kind regards, David Tait David A. Tait Policy Specialist (Solicitor qualified in Scotland) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: + 44-7864-793776 Email: david.tait(a)icann.org<mailto:david.tait@icann.org> www.icann.org

1 0

FW: GNSO Elections
by Glen de Saint Géry Oct. 5, 2016

Oct. 5, 2016

Dear Councillors, Pursuant to the elections procedures https://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/proposed-council-chair-07sep16-en.pdf please find the RrSG and RySG, nominee, James Bladel, for the position of Chair of the GNSO Council. 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/> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>. From: Graeme Bunton Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 9:13 PM To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Cc: pdiaz(a)pir.org; jbladel(a)godaddy.com; cph-excoms(a)googlegroups.com Subject: GNSO Elections Hello Glen, The RrSG and RySG, collectively the CPH, wish to nominate James Bladel for the position of Chair of the GNSO Council. Should you have require any further information please let us know. Regards, Graeme -- _________________________ Graeme Bunton Manager, Analytics and Insights Manager, Public Policy Tucows Inc. PH: 416 535 0123 ext 1634

1 0

Please RSVP: Pre-ICANN 57 Policy Update Webinar Announcement
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 5, 2016

Oct. 5, 2016

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-10-05-en Please RSVP via this form<https://goo.gl/forms/LTVbnZ8zXIBp5fFm1> by 14 October 2016. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 17 October 2016. The ICANN Policy Development Support Team will provide a Policy Update Webinar on Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 10:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC, in preparation for the upcoming ICANN Annual General Meeting in Hyderabad. The purpose of the webinar is to summarize policy activities across the ICANNpolicy development community and briefing the community on the Cross-Community sessions taking place in Hyderabad. Cross-Community Sessions Briefings: * New generic Top Level Domain Auction Proceeds Drafting Team * Cross-Community Working Group for Framework of Cross-Community Working Group Principles * Cross-Community Working Group on Use of Country/Territory Names as Top Level Domains Community Engagement Team Update: * Community Recognition at ICANN57 and Multistakeholder Ethos Award 2017 Process Launch * Supporting Organizations/Advisory Committees Work Effort Inventory/Snapshot Update * Policy Staff Support in Community Charter Amendment Processes Supporting Organizations & Advisory Committee Updates: * Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and Regional Internet Registries (RIR) Policy Development * Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Update * Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) * New generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (PDP) * Review of all Rights Protection Mechanisms in all Generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) Policy Development Process (PDP) * Next-Generation Generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) Registration Directory Services to Replace WHOIS Policy Development Process (PDP) * IGO/INGO Access to Curative Rights Mechanisms Policy Development Process (PDP) * At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and At-Large Community Update * Government Advisory Committee (GAC) * Adaptation of Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Processes to the new ICANN Bylaws * Government Advisory Committee Vice-Chairs Elections taking place in Hyderabad * Capacity Building Session for the Asia Pacific Region organized by the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Working Group for Underserved Regions * The Government Advisory Committee developing further input for ongoing Policy Development Processes on Registration Directory Services and Future new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) * Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Update * Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Update The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session runs for 90 minutes and will be run in English. The webinar will be conducted in Adobe Connect along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may be submitted using the chat function in Adobe Connect. Recordings of the webinars will be made available here<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/presentations-2012-08-27-en>. The Policy Development Support Team is always available to answer any questions via email at policyinfo(a)icann.org<mailto:policyinfo@icann.org>. Please RSVP via this form<https://goo.gl/forms/LTVbnZ8zXIBp5fFm1> by 14 October 2016. Remote participation details will be sent the week of 17 October 2016.

1 0

FW: Note from CWG Chairs to CWG Chartering Organizations
by James M. Bladel Oct. 5, 2016

Oct. 5, 2016

Councilors – Please see below for a message from the leadership of the CWG-IANA Stewardship to all SO/AC chartering organizations. Thank you, J. From: Yuko Green <yuko.green(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 11:45 Subject: Note from CWG Chairs to CWG Chartering Organizations Dear Chairs of the Chartering Organizations of the CWG IANA Stewardship, Below, please find the note from the Co-Chairs of the CWG: -- Dear SO & AC Colleagues, As Chartering Organisations of the CWG IANA Stewardship you will be fully aware of the historic IANA Stewardship Transition which came into effect on 01 October 2016. As co-chairs of the CWG IANA Stewardship, we have taken the step of writing to the CWG in order to thank the group as well as the ICANN staff that supported the group, for all of their significant work over the past couple of years. In addition to the deserved thanks communicated to all, we have confirmed to the group that we view our task as complete. For the record and in summary, we have completed the following: - Diligently prepared the proposal (in response to the RFP from the ICG), - Referred the proposal to the Chartering Organisations for approval - Submitted the proposal to the ICG - Worked closely with ICANN staff on the implementation of the proposal Accordingly, we would like to now formally communicate to you that we now view our work as complete. We believe that this has been an excellent example of a truly multi-stakeholder process and which has demonstrated the strength of the cross community working group approach. Thank-you for the opportunity to undertake this work and for your support throughout the process. Yours sincerely, Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson CWG IANA Stewardship Co-Chairs Cc: ICG Chair and Deputy Chairs -- Yuko Green Strategic Programs Manager Global Domains Division Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct Line: +1 310 578 8693 Mobile: +1 310 745 1517 E-mail: yuko.green(a)icann.org<mailto:yuko.green@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

KIND REMINDER: ICANN News Alert -- Help Improve ICANN, Take the At-Large Review Survey!
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Oct. 5, 2016

Oct. 5, 2016

Hello Councillors, just a kind reminder of the At-Large Review Survey that I mentioned in AoB on the last Council call --- as part of the Affirmation of Commitments mandated At-Large Review. This is a high level review, with hired external consultants producing an important report with recommendations, so I hope you can find the 10-15 minutes to provide your opinion. English: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ French: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-fr/ Spanish: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-es/ Kindest regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Liaison -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Help Improve ICANN, Take the At-Large Review Survey! Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:30:39 -0400 From: ICANN News Alert <no-reply(a)external.icann.org> Reply-To: no-reply(a)external.icann.org To: ocl(a)gih.com ICANN News Alert ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-09-26-en ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Help Improve ICANN, Take the At-Large Review Survey! 26 September 2016 The Independent Examiner ITEMS is seeking broad community input to measure community perception of the effectiveness of At-Large internal procedure, work output, and the leadership team. Please take this online survey http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ to inform ITEMS recommendations in its final March 2017 Report. The survey closes on 21 October 2016!

1 0