Dear Stéphane & fellow councillors, We have today discussed this motion during the course of the Registries SG meeting. A concern was expressed and discussed in some detail about the reason for delay and directly linking a PDP process (on Thick WHOIS) with contractual negotiations (on .com). The PDP process and the contractual negotiation processes are essentially distinct and separate processes. Therefore, Id like to propose a friendly amendment to modify the motion in order to deal with this concern. I have attached suggested re-wording of the motion to accommodate this concern. Best wishes, Jonathan From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: 04 April 2012 14:22 To: council@gnso.icann.org GNSO Subject: [council] Motion to delay thick WHOIS PDP All, You will remember that in CR the Council expressed a desire to delay the thick whois PDP. Since then, the Council leadership and Staff have discussed this at length. First, it has been deemed necessary to have a formal motion to do this. Due to the deadline for motions being today, I have asked that a motion to that effect be prepared and I am submitting this today. I am doing this as Chair, from an administrative point of view, to help see this process moved forward. Second, we've had extensive discussions on what voting threshold should be used for this motion. In the end, we have ascertained that as there is no specific reference to a PDP suspension process in the bylaws, the default threshold should be used (see bylaws section 3.9: http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#X-3.9). Motion attached. Thanks,