August 2016 - council - lists.icann.org

Fwd: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 2016 Nominating Committee Announces Selections - ICANN
by James M. Bladel Aug. 30, 2016

Aug. 30, 2016

Councilors, FYI. Erika Mann will be joining our group beginning in ICANN57. Thank you, J. ____________ James Bladel Begin forwarded message: From: David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>> Date: August 30, 2016 at 03:46:46 CDT Subject: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN 2016 Nominating Committee Announces Selections - ICANN https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-08-29-en Sent from my iPhone David A. Olive Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters -Istanbul Hakki Yeten Cad. Selenium Plaza No:10/C K:10 34349<tel:10%2034349> Fulya, Besiktas, Istanbul Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

4 3

(Draft) MOTION - IAG Report and Recommended Modifications to WHOIS Conflict Procedure
by James M. Bladel Aug. 30, 2016

Aug. 30, 2016

Council Colleagues - In compliance with our Documents & Motions deadline, I hereby submit the following motion (attached and copied below) for consideration during our next meeting on 1 SEP. Also: please note that the RrSG is still discussing its position on this motion. Accordingly, my submission of it shouldn't be taken as endorsement of the current language, as my ExCom may yet instruct me to raise amendments or abstain from voting. Thank you- J. ________________________________ Draft motion - Confirmation that modification to procedure that implements the Whois conflicts with privacy law policy recommendation is consistent with the intent of the policy recommendation Whereas, In November 2005, the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) concluded a policy development process (PDP) on Whois conflicts with privacy law, which recommended the creation of a procedure to address conflicts between a contracted party's Whois obligations and local/national privacy laws or regulations. The ICANN Board of Directors adopted the recommendations in May 2006 and the final procedure was made effective in January 2008. As noted in the GNSO Operating Procedures, "Periodic assessment of PDP recommendations and policies is an important tool to guard against unexpected results or inefficient processes arising from GNSO policies". As called for in Step 6 of the ICANN Procedure For Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/whois-privacy-conflicts-procedure-200…>, ICANN launched a review of the procedure in May 2014. Following a Call for Volunteers addressed to all interested parties, an Implementation Advisory Group (IAG) was formed to review the implementation of the policy recommendations and began its work in January 2015. The IAG devoted most of its time discussing whether additional triggers to invoke the procedure should be incorporated and if so how to ensure that they remain consistent with the existing policy. On 26 May 2016, the IAG submitted its final report and recommendation to the GNSO Council. The IAG recommends a modification to the existing Whois Conflicts Procedure. The modification would allow a party to trigger the procedure by obtaining a written statement from the government agency charged with enforcing its data privacy laws indicating that a particular Whois obligation conflicts with national law and then submitting that statement to ICANN. Resolved, The GNSO Council has reviewed the IAG Final Report (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iag-review-whois-conflicts-procedure-23may1…) and concludes that the proposed modification to the procedure conforms to the intent of the original policy recommendations and as such the GNSO Council confirms its non-objection to the modification being implemented by GDD Staff as outlined in Appendix I (http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iag-review-whois-conflicts-procedure-append…) as soon as practically feasible. The GNSO Council recommends that as soon as the modification has been implemented all affected parties are informed accordingly. Furthermore, the GNSO Council requests that ICANN staff monitor the implementation of the modified procedure to determine whether the modification addresses the issues identified by the IAG Final Report and report back accordingly. The GNSO Council thanks the IAG for its work and takes note of the minority views included in the Final Report. The GNSO Council requests that these are shared with the Next-Generation Registration Directory Services PDP Working Group as the broader WHOIS issues raised in these views are expected to be dealt with in that PDP.

3 3

Two Letter gTLD Domains
by Phil Corwin Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

Council colleagues: Over the weekend Milton Mueller posted a rather provocative blog at http://www.internetgovernance.org/2016/08/26/another-government-land-grab-i… , concerning the just-closed comment period on Proposed Measures for Letter/Letter Two-Character ASCII Labels to Avoid Confusion with Corresponding Country Codes (at https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-measures-two-char-2016-07-08…) It prompted me to review the filed comments, and I noted that the NCSG, IPC, and registry SG all came out against aspects of the staff proposal that concerns Prof. Mueller. While this item is not on our agenda for the September 1st call, I would hope that we can at least begin a preliminary discussion during the concluding AOB section. I would like to better understand the historic context for the current proposal. Beyond the specifics of the proposal, my more general concern is that ICANN may be moving to implement a general policy for gTLDs that originates from ICANN staff rather than a PDP, and that apparently there is not even GAC Consensus Advice to which the proposal is responding. Thanks and best regards, 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

2 2

FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN57 High Interest Topics due by 18 August (EXTENDED TO 1 SEP)
by James M. Bladel Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

Council Colleagues - Just a reminder that this call for topics for ICANN57 Hyderabad was extended until 1 SEP (this Thursday). The leadership of your SG/C should have already begun the submission process, but if not there are still a few days left. Thanks- J. Date: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 5:46 Cc: Nick Tomasso <nick.tomasso(a)icann.org<mailto:nick.tomasso@icann.org>>, "Tanzanica S. King" <tanzanica.king(a)icann.org<mailto:tanzanica.king@icann.org>> Subject: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN57 High Interest Topics due by 18 August Dear All: We're just 12 weeks out from ICANN57 in Hyderabad, and it's time to collaborate on another schedule for the meeting. As defined by the new meeting strategy, this first "Meeting C" will focus on showcasing ICANN's work to a broader global audience. With that in mind, we're going to kick off production of the schedule with a call for submissions of high-interest / cross-community discussion topics. Topic sessions should be planned as 75-90 minute interactive sessions about topics with high-interest potential, and have clear goals/objectives, and a statement of what session will accomplish. Sessions must have potential to attract a sizable audience (200+) and have a format that allows for adequate audience participation. Proposals should include: 1. Background/Importance 2. Session goals and expected outcomes 3. Hyperlinks to any relevant documentation Please use the online form at https://icann.wufoo.com/forms/icann57-high-interest-topic-proposal-form/ to submit proposals by EOD Thursday, 18 August. Please note that this form is not behind the VPN, therefore support staff for ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees have the option of submitting proposals on behalf of their group, or extending an invitation directly to the form. All proposed topics will be evaluated by the Steering Committee and shared with SO/AC leadership for comment. Our schedule production dates are also included below for your reference. I'll follow up with more details and next steps for scheduling before our first EMS request period on the 25th. As always, please let me know if you have any questions! Best, Tanzanica ICANN57 SCHEDULE PRODUCTION DATES Submissions Open: High Interest Topics Now through Thursday, 18 August EMS Request Period: Board, SO/AC & GDD Sessions Only Form Opens: Thursday, 25 August EMS Request Period: All Session Requests Form Opens: Thursday, 1 September Request Deadline / Schedule Closed Thursday, 22 September Public Schedule Posted Online Thursday, 13 October ________________________________ Tanzanica S. King Sr. Manager, Meeting Strategy and Design ICANN

1 0

Please Review Project List
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 29, 2016

Aug. 29, 2016

Dear Councillors, Attached please find the red-lined and clean version of the GNSO Project list for your review before the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday 1 September 2016. This will be posted at: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project 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

[HOTEL #232761] FW: [council] [Soac-infoalert] ICANN57 Hyderabad: What You Need to Know (Part 2) - ICANN
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

Dear Councillors and Mason - GNSO liaison to the GAC, The Meeting Team has provided us with this information for all GNSO travelers receiving support from ICANN. GNSO is being housed at the Westin Hyderabad Hotel. Confirmations are coming within the next few days. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)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 and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

4 4

Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 1 September 2016
by Glen de Saint Géry Aug. 26, 2016

Aug. 26, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find the proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 1 September 2016 Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Documents+1+Septemb… 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: 12:00 UTC http://tinyurl.com/hbwu5tf 05:00 Los Angeles; 08:00 Washington; 13:00 London; 15:00 Istanbul; 22:00 Hobart 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. 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 on 21 July 2016 to be approved on 27 August 2016. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (5 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 (5 minutes) 3.1 - Confirm dates for selection of GAC-GNSO liaison (motion passed on 30 June 2016) based on updated ICANN57 meeting dates: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+30+June+2016 Motion as passed, with dates to be updated highlighted as indicated below: Resolved: 1. The GNSO Council hereby confirms the extension of the term of the current GNSO Liaison to the GAC, Mason Cole, until the end of the ICANN AGM in Hyderabad. 2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies of the extended selection timeline (Nominations Accepted for Candidates - 1 OCT 2016; Council Chairs consider candidates and notify first choice - 20 OCT; Chairs submit motion to Council by 29 OCT (change to 28 October) for consideration during Council meeting on 8 NOV (change to 7 November); GAC Leadership notified of new Liaison by 9 NOV). Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - Approval of Recommendations from the Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements (10 minutes) In April 2015 the GNSO Council requested that the Standing Committee on GNSO Improvements (SCI) document the existing customary practices of the GNSO Council concerning (i) whether, how and by whom a properly submitted motion before the Council is to be seconded, and (ii) the treatment of proposed amendments to such motions as either "friendly" or "unfriendly". The Council's request also authorized the SCI to develop new processes for these practices if the SCI believed that the current practices are inappropriate. Separately, in November 2015, the GNSO Council requested that the SCI review Sections 2.2(b), (f) and (g) of the GNSO Operating Procedures with respect to, first, clarifying: (i) the eligibility of incoming Council members to run for the position of GNSO Chair; (ii) the start and end dates as well as the duration of the Chair and Vice-Chair terms in accordance with the ICANN Bylaws; and (iii) the timing of publication of the election results; and, secondly, recommending a general time table for election of the GNSO Chair. In October 2015 and in accordance with the Council's April request, the SCI sent its documentation of the Council's practices on the seconding and amendment of motions to the Council (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/aikman-scalese-vansnick-to-robinso…) Subsequently, the SCI reached Full Consensus on a proposal to codify the current customary practices in the GNSO Operating Procedures as a new Section 3.3.3: Submitting, Seconding, and Amending Motions. With respect to its review of the rules governing the GNSO Chair and Vice-Chair elections, the SCI reached Full Consensus on modifications to Section 2.2 and a proposal for a new Section 2.2.1: Procedures for a Situation Where a New GNSO Chair Has Not Been Elected by the End of the Previous Chair's Term in the GNSO Operating Procedures. The SCI's proposals were published for public comment on 5 July 2016 (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2016-07-05-en) By the close of the public comment period on 14 August, two public comments had been received supporting the SCI's proposals (https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-gnso-op-procedures-05jul16/) Here the Council will consider whether or not to approve the SCI's recommendations for modifying the GNSO Operating Procedures as proposed. 4.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/x/FQObAw> (Amr Elsadr) 4.2 - Discussion 4.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority) Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Adoption of Implementation Advisory Group Recommendations to Update Procedure on WHOIS Conflicts with National Laws (15 minutes) The GNSO's 2005 Policy on WHOIS Conflicts with National Laws (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois-privacy/council-rpt-18jan06.htm) had recommended the creation of a procedure to address conflicts between a contracted party's WHOIS obligations and local/national privacy laws or regulations. Under the existing procedure dating from January 2008, a contracted party that credibly demonstrates that it is legally prevented from complying with its WHOIS obligations can invoke the procedure, which defines a credible demonstration as one in which the contracted party has received "notification of an investigation, litigation, regulatory proceeding or other government or civil action that might affect its compliance." The procedure has never been invoked. In May 2014, ICANN launched a review of the procedure. An Implementation Advisory Group (IAG) was formed and began its work in January 2015. The IAG's Initial Report was published for public comment in November 2015 (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/iag-whois-conflicts-privacy-2015-10-0…) On 25 May 2016, the IAG's Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/pdf1nt18yPBer.pdf>, accompanying Appendices<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/pdfC9Dr9B5OBO.pdf> and a summary Memo to the GNSO Council<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/pdfZPGKEDdzDq.pdf> was delivered to the GNSO Council. The IAG proposed modifications to the procedure that it believes do not affect the underlying Policy. The Council received an update on the proposed modifications at ICANN56 and discussed the matter further at its meeting on 21 July. Here the Council will confirm whether or not the IAG's proposed modifications conform with the underlying GNSO Policy. 5.1 - Presentation of the motion<https://community.icann.org/x/FQObAw> (James Bladel) 5.2 - Discussion 5.3 - Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority) Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - ICANN Board Letter on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (20 minutes) On 5 August 2016, ICANN Board Chair Dr. Steve Crocker sent a letter to the GNSO Council concerning work on the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/crocker-to-bladel-05aug16-en.pdf) The Board wished to know the GNSO Council's view of the current work in light of the existing GNSO policy and ongoing parallel review work on the 2012 New gTLD Program. The Board letter specifically asked for information on the PDP timeline and whether the GNSO believes that the current PDP must be completed prior to advancing a new application process under the current policy recommendations, including whether any consideration has been given in relation to whether a future application process could proceed while policy work continues and be iteratively applied to the process for allocating new gTLDs. On 16 August the GNSO Chairs sent a reply to the Board on behalf of the Council, acknowledging the Board's request (https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/council-leadership-to-crocker-16au…) Here the Council will discuss the subject of the Board's letter and its further response, including whether or not input from the PDP Working Group may be helpful. 6.1 - Status update on the Board letter and PDP progress (James Bladel / Paul McGrady) 6.2 - Discussion 6.3 - Next steps Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Next Steps for the Cross Community Working Group on Internet Governance (10 minutes) The Charter<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/52888213/Charter%20ccWG%20…> for this Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) was ratified<https://community.icann.org/x/oQInAw> by the ccNSO Council (September 2014), the GNSO Council (October 2014), and the ALAC (April 2015). The ratified Charter provides that the CCWG scope includes doing "whatever it deems relevant and necessary to facilitate and ensure engagement and participation of the ICANN community in the global Internet governance scene and multi-stakeholder decision-making processes", with regular monthly updates to be provided to its Chartering Organizations and a periodic Progress Paper where appropriate. The Charter also provides that the Chartering Organizations should review the Charter and CCWG deliverables in order to determine whether the group should continue or be dissolved, with the proviso that the CCWG will continue if at least two of its Chartering Organizations extend the Charter and notify the other Chartering Organizations accordingly. At ICANN55, there was some discussion over the most appropriate forum for SO/AC interaction on Internet governance matters, especially given the expected forthcoming finalization of a Uniform Framework of Principles for Future CCWGs. The co-chairs of the CCWG-IG provided the Council with a Progress Report on its recent activities at ICANN56. Here the Council will discuss appropriate next steps in relation to overseeing the work of the CCWG. 7.1 - Review of status of Council discussion (James Bladel) 7.2 - Discussion 7.3 - Next steps Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Proposed Cost Control Mechanisms and Request for GNSO Council Validation of the Budget for the Cross Community Working Group on Ensuring ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) (15 minutes) On 10 July, the GNSO Council requested that the ICANN Board Finance Committee and the CCWG-Accountability co-chairs conduct a webinar to brief the Council and broader GNSO community on the Proposed Cost Control Mechanisms and the CCWG-Accountability's request for the GNSO Council to validate the proposed FY17 budget for the CCWG-Accountability (https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/bladel-to-bfc-ccwg-accountability-…) The proposed budget and costs had been reported to the GNSO Council on 21 June (https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/pdf9L4CYla9NE.pdf) The requested webinar took place on 24 August. Here the Council will discuss the CCWG-Accountability's request for the Council to validate the proposed FY17 budget in light of the further information provided during the webinar (recording and slides available at https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p8fu99qpt7d/) 8.1 - Status update (James Bladel) 8.2 - Discussion 8.3 - Next steps Item 9: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Planning and Scheduling for ICANN57 (15 minutes) ICANN57 will take place in Hyderabad, India, from 3-9 November 2016. This will be the first "Meeting C" under the new ICANN Meeting Strategy as well as the Annual General Meeting for ICANN. A draft GNSO schedule<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/meeting-c-schedule-11jul16-en.pdf> for the meeting was circulated to the GNSO Council on 11 July 2016 and reviewed at the Council meeting on 21 July. Here the Council will review all proposed GNSO sessions for ICANN57 in relation to the meeting schedule, including the face to face Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group meetings, the customary annual Development Session for incoming and continuing GNSO Councilors, and the submission of High Interest Topics of interest to the GNSO. 9.1 - Overview of the proposed schedule (James Bladel) 9.2 - Discussion 9.3 - Next steps Item 10: Any Other Business (10 minutes) 10.1 - Discussion of note from Chris Disspain on status of IGO acronyms protection work (https://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/docxwBd6RaeZsW.docx) 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 12:00 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+0DST 05:00 San José, Costa Rica UTC-5+0DST 07:00 Iowa City, USA (CDT<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00>) UTC-5+0DST 07:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-4+0DST 08:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART<http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html>) UTC-3+0DST 09:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+0DST 09:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 13:00 Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 14:00 Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 14:00 Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 15:00 Perth, Australia (WST<http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html>) UTC+8+0DST 20:00 Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 +0DST 20:00 Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 22:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/hbwu5tf 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

Webinar invitation: ICANN57 Hyderabad Wednesday 7 September 2016 15:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 25, 2016

Aug. 25, 2016

Dear all, Pursuant to Nick's Blog post (https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know) please join the ICANN57 Hyderabad webinar scheduled on Wednesday 7 September 2016 at 15:00 UTC For other times: http://tinyurl.com/jpj5hqs Adobe Connect: <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icann-soac> https://icann.adobeconnect.com/icann-soac Audio Bridge details: * Dial in numbers: <http://adigo.com/ICANN/> http://adigo.com/ICANN/ * Passcode: 2569# This session will be recorded and transcribed. Presentation deck and recordings will be posted here<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/presentations-2012-08-27-en>. Webinar agenda * Welcome - David Olive * ICANN57 Briefing and schedule - Nick Tomasso and Tanzania King * Q&A Session If you need a dial out, or more information regarding access to this webinar, please email Susie Johnson at susie.johnson(a)icann.org 1. Kind regards, Nathalie -- Nathalie Peregrine Specialist, SOAC Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<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

FW: Outside legal Support for WS2 --- FW: Slides and AC recording CCWG Accountability Webinar 22 August 2016
by Phil Corwin Aug. 25, 2016

Aug. 25, 2016

Fellow Council members: FYI, I am sharing these thoughts on yesterday’s legal support presentation, which I just shared with BC members. 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 From: Phil Corwin Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 11:39 AM To: bc-private icann.org (bc-private(a)icann.org) Subject: Outside legal Support for WS2 --- FW: Slides and AC recording CCWG Accountability Webinar 22 August 2016 BC members: Late yesterday I participated in a call for Council members regarding budgeting for WS2 Accountability issues. Attached are the materials used on the call. As you will note on the first page of the CCWG-Budget ownership document, the amount budgeted for external legal advice for all of the WS2 issues (and there are 9 separate tracks) is: Professional fees: using the legal advice for the total project over 2 years ($14m), 10% or $1.4m for WS2 considered a reasonable. That is, just 10% of the outside legal costs incurred for WS1 has been budgeted for WS2. When the Q&A/comment portion of the call opened up I made the following points: · We all support responsible budgeting and paring of unnecessary expenses in all ICANN funded work · That said, WS2 are not less important than WS1 issues – they are just issues that did not need to be resolved prior to the transition. Many are quite important to assuring post-transition ICANN accountability · Several of the WS2 topics – most notably staff accountability, transparency (which encompasses disclosure of internal staff communications and procedures) and good faith conduct in Board removal discussions – are ones where participating community members are more likely to desire assuredly impartial outside legal advice rather than that coming from ICANN’s own legal department · So, while it is reasonable to assume that WS2 outside legal expenses will be less than those for WS1 (e.g., there will be no need to draft and vet extensive new Bylaws or Articles of Incorporation provisions) a 10% cap may be unrealistically low On the call I also investigated the process for securing more funding if my concerns are borne out in practice. Page 3 of the PDF contains this information: 3. External legal advice  legal committee: to evaluate needs for legal advice, and determine adequate source to provide the answer, privileging the highest value (value = benefit / cost).  Legal committee membership to include an ICANN legal representative, community members with experience in procuring external legal advice, and the CCWG co-chairs. I asked on the call how the legal committee would reach decisions on funding needs and, in particular, whether the “ICANN legal representative” would have an equal voice. I was told that the individual from ICANN Legal would not have the same weight in making decisions, but I think we will need to see how this process plays out in practice. Slide 4 of the attached PPT has this information about the role of the Legal Committee: Role : Filter, analyze, refine (ensure clarity), and approve requests for legal advice Determine which firm is best suited to respond Process : The Committee meets at least once a month Based on subgroup requests documented and share before the meeting, Rapporteurs may attend relevant part of the call to discuss their requests LC ensures that request is a legal issue (not a policy one) With support from PCST, LC tracks legal expenses with clear distinction between what is related to its scope vs any other Legal costs. Counsel may be invited to attend parts of the LC meeting to ensure clarity of expectations and context (reminder : Counsel participation to CCWG and subgroup calls is exceptional only) Composition based on WS1 Legal subteam executive team, ie : León Sanchez (co-chair, lead) Samantha Eisner (support) Athina Fragkouli Robin Gross David McAuley Sabine Meyer Edward Morris Greg Shatan The final page of the attached PPT has this additional information regarding the process within the Legal Committee: Proposed guidelines for the Legal Committee: If Icann Legal already has an answer available to the question, it can be shared immediately to avoid extra costs. The Committee may direct the request at ICANN Legal or external firms, based on a case by case assessment. Decisions would have to take into account costs, delays, respective skills, as well as potential requirement for “independent” advice. The Committee is encouraged to use ICANN Legal as much as possible in order to manage costs effectively. Sidley & Adler will coordinate to decide which firm is best suited to address requests certified to CCWG Independent Counsel If the CCWG requests advice from Jones Day, then Jones Day should either (a) disclose that ICANN (and not the CCWG) is their client for purposes of the memo or (b) enter into an engagement specifically with the CCWG as client (same as Sidley and Adler), and that ICANN has provided a waiver of conflict of interest. Hiring of other firms for specific expertise would be subject to CCWG-ACCT and Icann Legal prior approval (similar process as during WS1) Once the LC has determined it needs to hire external legal counsel it forwards the request with relevant details, including estimated costs and a report from the PCST on the financial impact, to the Co-Chairs for approval. The Co-Chairs will consider the request and the financial impact as soon as possible and provide a formal response to the LC which will be documented on the CCWG WS2 Wiki if approved. Generally, I believe that the use of a Legal Committee to authorize and track outside legal expenses is sound. However, I do have some concern that the determinations of the Legal Committee are subject to final review and decision-making by the CCWG Co-Chairs. Further, it came out in the call that the final decision on any request for funds beyond the allocated $1.4 million will be made by the Board, which raises the disturbing possibility that the Board could veto a request for legal advice integral to final decisions on such matters as staff accountability, organizational transparency, and conduct in Board removal proceedings. I do not know if there is any way to get the $1.4 million cap reconsidered; it seemed on the call that it was set in stone. I certainly hope that it is sufficient to provide needed outside legal support for the remaining accountability work, but I did want to get my concerns on the record now in the event that the reality proves otherwise. 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 From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Nathalie Peregrine Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 7:09 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Slides and AC recording CCWG Accountability Webinar 22 August 2016 Dear all, Please find the presentations attached and the AC recording (audio and slides) of the CCWG Accountability webinar held today on 22 August 2016: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p8fu99qpt7d/<https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p8fu99qpt7d/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=4a5606fac094afb…> Kind regards, Nathalie ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2016.0.7752 / Virus Database: 4633/12811 - Release Date: 08/15/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date. ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> Version: 2016.0.7752 / Virus Database: 4633/12811 - Release Date: 08/15/16 Internal Virus Database is out of date.

2 2

FW: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN57 Hyderabad: What You Need to Know (Part 2) - ICANN
by James M. Bladel Aug. 24, 2016

Aug. 24, 2016

Council Colleagues - Please note the announcement & blog post below. In most cases, attendees will need a "Conference Visa" for ICANN57 Hyderabad, and an "eTourist" Visa may not be accepted for entry to India. ICANN has also provided a link to request an Invitation Letter. Thanks- J. From: <soac-infoalert-bounces(a)icann.org<mailto:soac-infoalert-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of David Olive <david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 at 8:55 Subject: [Soac-infoalert] ICANN57 Hyderabad: What You Need to Know (Part 2) - ICANN https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par… * Author: Nick Tomasso | Vice President, Meetings <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know-par…> Further to my blog<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know> on 25 July 2016, I would like to share details on visa applications to assist all who are attending ICANN57 Annual General Meeting in Hyderabad with your travel planning. We have worked extensively with the India government to ensure a clear and smooth process for all Indian visa applications. They have also assured us that all ICANN57 visa applications will be treated as priority. All delegates requiring visas to India should visit here<http://www.mea.gov.in/indian-missions-abroad.htm> to find the nearest India diplomatic mission to apply for your visa. You must apply for a Conference Visa. Please refer to the guide<https://meetings.icann.org/en/hyderabad57/visa-application-guide-india> we have put together for reference. Apply early as the process could take up to two weeks. You will also need invitation letters<https://invitationletters.icann.org/> from ICANN and the local host, which may take another two weeks to generate. Do take note that the e-Tourist Visa will not be applicable for our ICANN meeting. Any traveler trying to enter India with the e-Tourist Visa may be denied entry. If you have an existing valid Business Visa, you need not apply for the Conference Visa. We have set up a dedicated email (icann57visasupport(a)icann.org)<mailto:icann57visasupport@icann.org)> that you can contact should you need any further clarification about the visa. Remember to register<https://registration.icann.org/register.php?id=Hyderabad57> for ICANN57 and check our meeting site<https://meetings.icann.org/en/hyderabad57> for regular updates. Lastly, don't forget to attend the webinar on 7 September 2016 (1500 UTC) where we will share more information on ICANN57, logistics, accommodations and travel. Look out for our announcement and join us then. Sent from my iPhone David A. Olive Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support General Manager, ICANN Regional Headquarters -Istanbul

10 18