James Bladel proposed the motion that has been posted on
the Council Wiki
page:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+1+September+2016
We are calling for a seconder.
Thank
you.
Kind
regards,
Glen
Glen de Saint
Géry
GNSO
Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@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.
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of James M.
Bladel
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:19 AM
To: GNSO
Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] (Draft)
MOTION - IAG Report and Recommended Modifications to WHOIS Conflict
Procedure
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,
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-23may16-en.pdf) 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-appendix-1-23may16-en.pdf) 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.