Dear Jeff et al,

Here is a brief explanation with respect to the edits in the motion:

WHOIS Access recommendation #2:

Looking to ensure that compliance reports would be periodic. Staff’s (Pam Little) letter includes this commitment and so has been included.

Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #2:

In order to assist the process of data acquisition and help with what data is to be collected a small volunteer group suggested (the RAP WG does not exist at the moment and setting them up would require a Charter etc.)

WHOIS Access recommendation #1:

It wasn’t clear in the previous draft who would keep an eye on this. Since the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team may be looking into similar issue reference to them added.

Meta Issue: Uniformity of Reporting:

Language included for consistency with RAP WG & IDT report.

Uniformity of Contracts:

Previously was joined into preceding paragraph. Also due to voting threshold has been included as a separate resolved clause.

Gripe Sites, Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #2, and; Cybersquatting recommendation #2:

Language improvement and also to avoid any perception that the Council was rejecting the work of the WG.

Sincerely,

Zahid Jamil

Barrister-at-law

Jamil & Jamil

Barristers-at-law

219-221 Central Hotel Annexe

Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan

Cell: +923008238230

Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025

Fax: +92 21 35655026

www.jamilandjamil.com

Notice / Disclaimer

This message contains confidential information and its contents are being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is prohibited.

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
Sent: 15 September 2011 02:41
To: 'Neuman, Jeff'; council@gnso.icann.org; gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org; 'Glen de Saint Gery'; 'Glen de Saint Géry'
Cc: 'Marika Konings'; 'John Berard'
Subject: [SPAM] RE: [council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations

Dear Jeff,

Thanks.

Please find attached a redline version for everyone’s convenience (thanks to Marika).

As it is late here I will send an explanation for the changes my tomorrow.

Sincerely,

Zahid Jamil

Barrister-at-law

Jamil & Jamil

Barristers-at-law

219-221 Central Hotel Annexe

Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan

Cell: +923008238230

Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025

Fax: +92 21 35655026

www.jamilandjamil.com

Notice / Disclaimer

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: 14 September 2011 22:44
To: Zahid Jamil; council@gnso.icann.org; gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org; 'Glen de Saint Gery'; 'Glen de Saint Géry'
Cc: 'Marika Konings'; 'John Berard'
Subject: RE: [council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations

Zahid,

Can you please explain to the Council what the changes are to this motion from the last time it was presented (in Singapore) to the Council along with an explanation for the changes. I see there is something new here on uniformity of contracts as one example.

Thanks!

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy

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 us immediately and delete the original message.

From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 6:12 PM
To: council@gnso.icann.org; gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org; 'Glen de Saint Gery'; 'Glen de Saint Géry'
Cc: 'Marika Konings'; 'John Berard'
Subject: [council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations

Dear Councillors,

Please find below a motion on RAP I am proposing for the next GNSO Council call:

Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations

Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group submitted its report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf);

Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and decided to form an implementation drafting team to draft a proposed approach with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Final Report;

Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team submitted its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010 (see http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf);

Whereas the GNSO Council considered the proposed approached at its Working Session at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena;

Whereas the GNSO Council acted on a number of RAP recommendations at its meeting on 3 February 2011 (see http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102);

Whereas the GNSO Council requested feedback from ICANN Compliance in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1 and a response was received on 23 February 2011 (http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html). In addition, a discussion with Compliance Staff was held at the ICANN meeting in San Francisco.

Whereas the GNSO Council considered the remaining RAP recommendations in further detail during its working session at the ICANN meeting in Singapore based on an overview prepared by ICANN Staff (see http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/overview-rapwg-recommendations-18may11-en.pdf).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT:

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its feedback in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and determines that no further work on this recommendation is needed. The GNSO Council welcomes the commitment of the ICANN Compliance Department ‘to report on compliance activities and publish data about WHOIS accessibility, on at least an annual basis' (see (http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html).

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its feedback in relation to Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1 and determines that no further work on this recommendation is needed.

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council determines that additional information is needed from the Registrar Stakeholder Group with regard to the conditional Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #2 before an Issue Report should be requested of Staff. The GNSO Council hereby requests that the Registrar Stakeholder Group provide further information and data on the nature and scope of the issue of Fake Renewal Notices to help inform the GNSO Council’s and its RAP WG deliberations on whether an Issue Report should be requested. A small group of volunteers consisting of registrar representatives and others interested (including former RAP WG members) should be formed to prepare such a request, work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group to obtain the information requested and report back to the GNSO Council accordingly.

RESOLVED, in response to WHOIS Access recommendation #1, the GNSO Council requests the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team to consider including the issue of WHOIS Access as part of the survey it has been tasked to develop. If the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team is of the view that it is not appropriate or timely to include WHOIS Access as part of the survey, it should inform the GNSO Council accordingly so that the GNSO Council can determine what next steps, if any, might be appropriate at this stage in relation to this recommendation.

RESOLVED, with regard to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation and determines to defer its consideration until it evaluates the outcome of Malicious Use of Domain Names recommendation #1, which aims to develop best practices to help registrars and registries address the illicit use of domain names. In light of the pending request to Staff to develop a Discussion Paper on the Malicious Use of Domain Names, the GNSO Council believes that the upcoming review and analysis of this Discussion Paper may serve to inform the Council of the issues related to the Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices recommendation.

RESOLVED, in regard to the recommendations on cross-TLD Registration Scam and Domain Kiting/Tasting, the GNSO Council Chair shall communicate to the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) the findings of the RAP WG in this regard and request that the SSAC consider evaluating and/or monitoring these abuses. If the SSAC elects to conduct this work, the GNSO Council requests that the SSAC inform the GNSO Council if it believes that further policy work by the GNSO Council should be undertaken to address these two types of abuse. In addition, the GNSO Council suggests that the issue of cross-TLD registration scam be included in the agenda of its next meeting with the ccNSO Council since this type of abuse may also affect ccTLDs.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Uniformity of Reporting, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and hereby requests the ICANN Compliance Department to report on existing systems to report and track violations and/or complaints; improvements / changes made since the RAPWG Report or foreseen in the near future, and: identify gaps and any improvements that might be desirable but not foreseen at this stage. Further consideration of this Meta Issue, including the recommendations and considerations of the RAP WG in this regard, is deferred pending receipt of such information from the ICANN Compliance Department.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Uniformity of Contracts, the GNSO Council requests an Issue Report to evaluate whether a minimum baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in scope ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to address the most common forms of registration abuse.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendations on Gripe Sites, Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #2, and; Cybersquatting recommendation #2, since the RAPWG did not achieve consensus on these recommendations, the GNSO Council defers undertaking further policy work on these recommendations at this time.

RESOLVED, in response to Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #1, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and agrees with the RAPWG that no further action is called for at this time.

Sincerely,

Zahid Jamil

Barrister-at-law

Jamil & Jamil

Barristers-at-law

219-221 Central Hotel Annexe

Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan

Cell: +923008238230

Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025

Fax: +92 21 35655026

www.jamilandjamil.com

Notice / Disclaimer