Hi, In response to an action item from the last meeting, I have submitted 3 possible motions in response to the Issues Report on Registration Abuse. Some of the details still need to be filled out, but I wanted to get these to the council as soon as possible. They are on the wiki. They are conceived of as a sequence: 1 We set up a team to create a WG charter to deal with the open issues as recommended in the Issues Report 2. we vote on a PDP as required by the bylaws 3. if we do not approve the PDP at this time, we resolve to vote again on the PDP once the work has been completed by the WG. thanks a. ------- Motions on Registration Abuse Policy (to be completed) 1. WG motion Made By: Avri Doria Seconded: Whereas: The Issues Report on GNSO Issues Report on Registration Abuse Policies indicated that further review, evaluation and study be done before a PDP is initiated, Resolved: That a drafting team be formed to create a proposed charter for a working group to investigate the open issues documented in the issues report on Registrations Abuse Policy. Specifically: 9.1 Review and Evaluate Findings A first step would be for the GNSO Council to review and evaluate the findings, taking into account that this report provides an overview of registration abuse provisions, but does not analyse how these provisions are implemented in practice and whether they are deemed effective in addressing registration abuse. 9.2 Identify specific policy issues Following the review and evaluation of the findings, the GNSO Council would need to determine whether there are specific policy issues regarding registration abuse. As part of this determination it would be helpful to define the specific type(s) of abuse of concern, especially distinguishing between registration abuse and other types of abuse if relevant. 9.3 Need for further research As part of the previous two steps, ICANN Staff would recommend that the GNSO Council determines where further research may be needed – e.g. is lack of uniformity a substantial problem, how effective are current registration abuse provisions in addressing abuse in practice, is an initial review or analysis of the UDRP required? The WG charter should be ready for review by the council on or before 15 January 2009 and will be voted on at the council meeting of 29 January 2009. 2. PDP motion Made By: Avri Doria Seconded: Whereas: An Issues Report on GNSO Issues Report on Registration Abuse Policies has been produced and the by-laws (insert section #) require a vote on the formation of a Policy Development Process, Resolved: That a PDP on Registration Abuse Policy be initiated. 3. Contingent Motion Made By: Avri Doria Seconded: Whereas: The motion to initiate a PDP at this time failed and a Working group has been formed to further investigate the issue presented in the Issues report Resolved: The GNSO Council will reconsider initiating a PDP on Registration Abuse Policy once the Working has produced its report and it has been subject to constituency and public review. Motions on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Whereas: An Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery has been produced and introduced to the GNSO Council. Resolve: The GNSO Council members will consult with their constituencies in preparation for a vote on a PDP and other possible motions at the Council meeting on 8 January.