All, Our list has been a little quiet but we clearly need to be thinking about and prepared to make progress with a few key items. So, I felt it was appropriate to flag these ahead of our call later today. Please find below my personal attempt to both capture the key issues and highlight where we need to make progress. Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations Discussion (20 Minutes) · We have a draft letter to Fadi Chehade and an ultimate deadline of the end of February (according to Fadis note of 19 December 2012). · Our next full Council meeting is scheduled for 14 February 2012 so there is one more meeting available to us if necessary. · At our last meeting, I suggested sending some form of interim response to Fadi and that remains an option. · There seemed to be quite strong support for the letter in the form drafted but there were also significant opposition from some groups and that needs to be accounted for. · We did discuss waiting to assess the public comment input on the topic and that initial public comment period has now closed. · There was some discussion of providing additional text to go into the letter but I do not recall seeing anything on list. · Ideally we should produce a letter which has consensus support but clearly that may be challenging in this case. · Mason made the original draft and absent any suggestions to the contrary, holds the pen on this one. Regardless, we need to move it forward. · If you have strong views on this, please contribute on list by providing constructive input on the draft text and/or be prepared to guide our direction at the meeting. · Also, is there any additional work that the Council should or could be organising in order to move this and related issues forwards? Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Response to the GAC Letter · We have a draft letter to the GAC and a self-imposed deadline of January 2013 in order to provide a full response. · I had hoped to use January in order to potentially talk with the GAC Chair and/or members of the GAC about our likely response but that has not happened to date. · Jeff (and colleagues) made a good attempt at a first draft and we now need to move this forward to a conclusion. Item 9: INFORMATION & DISCUSION <http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/36239> Policy vs. Implementation · ICANN staff have prepared and circulated a paper. This has been distributed to the Council and beyond (e.g. to other SOs and ACs) · This is clearly a meta-issue which threads through both items 7 & 8 above and therefore throughout the broader community. · Its also very closely linked to the core of our function as a Council and therefore something we need to be informed on and prepared to provide quality input and direction on. · Input needs to be in the form of both contribution to the content as well as the mechanics of how to move the issue forward within the broader community. Item 10: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - ATRT2 Developments · The application period closed on 14 January 2013 so we now have the full set of applicants visible. · This includes 7 applicants who are associated with the GNSO. The GNSO Councils next steps in this respect need to be as follows: · Encourage / remind stakeholder groups to provide their endorsements as soon as possible (done by me yesterday). · Take those endorsements and review these against diversity criteria. · Propose up to two additional candidates if necessary to meet diversity criteria. · Announce our list of endorsed candidates. The SGs were previously advised to provide endorsements by 24 January 2013. We planned to meet as a council to review these endorsements between 24 January & 28 January but this has proved not to be practical. We now plan to meet as a Council on 21st January at 15h00 UTC in order to review these endorsements and so I have indicated to SGs that we need to receive their endorsements by then. Please can Councillors assist by doing what they can to ensure we have the endorsements from SGs by 20th January. I trust that this will be helpful in assisting us to move forward with key items and that this approach will be taken in the spirit it is intended i.e. to contribute to one of the key themes of us being and being seen to be a constructive and effective GNSO Council. Thank-you for giving these items your attention and I look forward to meeting with you at 20h00 UTC. Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: 14 January 2013 22:39 To: council@gnso.icann.org List Subject: [council] GNSO Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, 17 January 2013 at 20:00UTC: Dear Councillors, Please find the updated draft agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on Thursday, 17 January 2013 at 20:00UTC: The main updates are the description of the two motions, Items 4 & 5 and the addition of Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (10 minutes) The agenda is published on pages: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jan> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#jan <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-17jan13-en.htm> http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-17jan13-en.htm On the Wiki at: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda-17+January+2 013> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda-17+January+20 13 and the motions can be viewed at: <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+-+17+Januar y+2013> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+-+17+January +2013 This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated. <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/gnso-operating-procedures-13sep12-en.pdf 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. <http://tinyurl.com/bojlrbx> Meeting Times 20:00 UTC <http://tinyurl.com/ado9n7t> http://tinyurl.com/ado9n7t Coordinated Universal Time 20:00 UTC 12:00 Los Angeles; 15:00 Washington; 20:00 London; 21:00 Paris; 09:00 Wellington (next day 14 January 2013) Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed. GNSO Council meeting audio cast <http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u> http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes) 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Statement of interest updates General updates and/or for specific current agenda items. 1.3 Review main changes. 1.4 Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes of the <http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/minutes-council-20dec12-en.htm> GNSO Council meeting 20 December 2012 were approved effective 2 January 2013. 1.5 GNSO Pending Projects List <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf> http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf * Review main changes. * Comments and/or questions. Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes) Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes) Item 4: MOTION Initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D (10 minutes) The Council requested an Issue Report on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D at its meeting on 17 October 2012. The Final Issue Report was submitted to the GNSO Council on 8 January 2013. The Council is now requested to consider the initiation of a PDP on the issues outlined in the Final Issue Report. Link to <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+-+17+Januar y+2013> motion 4.1 Reading of the motion (Mason Cole). 4.2 Discussion of motion and next steps. 4.3 Vote (Initiate a PDP: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) Item 5: MOTION Motion for Approval of a Charter for the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D Working Group (WG) (10 minutes) Normally, when a PDP is initiated, the Council convenes a DT to draft a charter for the work to be carried out. In this instance, in the interest of efficiency and because the issues laid out in the IRTP-D Final Issues Report are very precise, it is being suggested that the Council adopt the charter as proposed and request that this work be started by a WG asap. A motion is being made to that effect, to be considered only if the first IRTP-D motion passes. Link to <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+-+17+Januar y+2013> motion 5.1 Reading of the motion (Mason Cole). 5.2 Discussion of motion and next steps. 5.3 Vote (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) Item 6: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - GNSO Council Review and SIC Update (15 minutes) In Toronto, the Chair of the SIC provided an overview of a new framework for future independent review efforts at ICANN. The GNSO was used as a case study to describe the effort because it is the first Supporting Organization lined-up in the next review cycle. Staff will brief the Council on the set of criteria metrics for GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, and the work underway to develop metrics for the Council and the Working Group Model of policy. 6.1 Update from Staff (Rob Hogarth) 6.2 Discussion 6.3 Next Steps Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations Discussion (20 Minutes) ICANNs CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/chehade-to-robinson-04dec12-en.pdf> Strawman Proposal recently developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment. <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm> http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm. ICANNs CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a limited preventative registration mechanism which is also currently available for public comment. A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANNs CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013. Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper ( <http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287> http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2). The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken. The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations. 7.1 Update 7.2 Discussion 7.3 Next Steps Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Response to the GAC Letter (20 minutes) The GAC has sent a <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/dryden-to-robinson-28nov12-en.pdf> letter to the GNSO Council with regard to the initiation of a PDP on the IGO/INGO issue, and specifically requesting a rationale for undertaking a PDP i.e. an explanation as to why GNSO believes this issue should be evaluated through a PDP rather than simply executed as an implementation process. The Council has sent an initial response and now needs to move ahead with developing a full response. This is a discussion item. 8.1 Update 8.2 Discussion 8.3 Next steps Item 9: INFORMATION & DISCUSION <http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/36239> Policy vs. Implementation (20 minutes) The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset. Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper ( <http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/36239> http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/36239) that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic. 9.1 Update from Staff (Marika Konings) 9.2 Discussion 9.3 Next steps Item 10: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - ATRT2 Developments (5 minutes) The call for applicants to serve on the next Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT) has been extended until 14 January 2013. (See: <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-03dec12-en.htm> http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-03dec12-en.htm ). An update on the process and next steps to provide GNSO Council endorsements of applicants will be provided. This is a discussion item. 10.1 Update (Wolfe-Ulrich Knoben) 10.2 Discussion 10.3 Next steps Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (10 minutes) At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services (include link to presentation). The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study. 11.1 Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman) 11.2 Discussion 11.3 Next steps Item 12: Any Other Business (5 minutes) 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 <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> Annex A): 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 ( <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf> GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4) 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 meetings 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.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 20:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html> PST) UTC-8+0DST 12:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 15:00 Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 18:00 Montevideo, Uruguay ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/uyst.html> UYST) UTC-3+1DST 18:00 Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 20:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 20:00 Abuja, Nigeria ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/africa/wat.html> WAT) UTC+1+0DST 21:00 Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 21:00 Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 21:00 Ramat Hasharon, Israel ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/ist-israel. html> IST) UTC+2+0DST 22:00 Karachi, Pakistan ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/asia/pkt.html> PKT ) UTC+5+0DST 01:00 - next day Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 04:00 - next day Perth, Australia ( <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> WST) UTC+8+0DST 04:00 next day Wellington, New Zealand ( <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/pacific/nzdt.htm l> NZDT ) UTC+12+1DST 09:00 next day ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see: <http://www.timeanddate.com> http://www.timeanddate.com <http://tinyurl.com/ado9n7t> http://tinyurl.com/ado9n7t Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat <mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org