Dear all, Please find below the resolutions from the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday, 10 April 2025 which will be posted shortly on the GNSO Council resolutions <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/202...> page. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri 20250410-1 Consent Agenda GNSO Council Motion to Adopt the GNSO Council Review of ICANN82 GAC Communiqué Issues of Importance Submitted by: Nacho Amadoz Whereas, 1. The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting. 2. The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) is responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains. 3. The GNSO Council has expressed a desire to provide feedback to the ICANN Board on issues in the GAC Communiqué as these relate to generic top-level domains to inform the ICANN Board as well as the broader community of past, present, or future gTLD policy activities that may directly or indirectly relate to Advice provided by the GAC. 4. The GNSO Council's review of GAC Communiqué Advice and Issues of Importance<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/correspondence/dibias...> is intended to further enhance the co-ordination and promote the sharing of information on gTLD related policy activities between the GAC, Board, and the GNSO. Resolved, 1. The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Review of the ICANN82 Seattle Communiqué Issues of Importance<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/draft/draft-gnso-coun...> (there was no GAC Advice provided for ICANN82) and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Council Review of ICANN82 GAC Communiqué Issues of Importance to the ICANN Board. 2. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Liaison to the GAC also informs the GAC of the communication between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board. Vote Results<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/vote-result/gnso-coun...> 20250410-2 Consent Agenda GNSO Council Motion to Approve the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding the Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process Working Group Submitted by: Nacho Amadoz Whereas: 1. On 12 March 2025, the GNSO Council unanimously approved<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/2020-current#202503> the forty-seven (47) Full Consensus policy recommendations from the Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process Working Group by a GNSO Supermajority; 2. On 31 March 2025, as required under the ICANN Bylaws, a GNSO Council Recommendations Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/draft/gnso-council-re...> to the ICANN Board on the approved PDP recommendations was submitted to the GNSO Council for its consideration. Resolved: 1. The GNSO Council approves the Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding the Final Recommendations from the Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process Working Group and instructs the GNSO Secretariat to transmit the report to the ICANN Board and communicate the outcomes from the GNSO Council's decision as appropriate. Vote Results<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/vote-result/gnso-coun...> 20250410-3 **Updated as friendly amendment Motion to confirm EPDP on Temporary Specification Team’s Intent to Modify RAA Requirements Related to Billing Contact Submitted by: Greg Dibiase Seconded by: Farzaneh Badii WHEREAS 1. On 17 May 2018<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-05-17-en>, the ICANN Board adopted the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-registration-data-specs-en/#temp-...> (Temporary Specification) pursuant to the procedures in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement concerning the establishment of temporary policies. 2. Following the adoption of the Temporary Specification, and per the procedure for Temporary Policies as outlined in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement, a Consensus Policy development process as set forth in ICANN's Bylaws needed to be initiated immediately and completed within a one-year time period from the implementation effective date (25 May 2018) of the Temporary Specification. 3. On 19 July 2018, the GNSO Council approved the EPDP Initiation Request<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-...> and the EPDP Team Charter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-...>. 4. The EPDP followed the prescribed EPDP procedures as stated in the Bylaws, resulting in a Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld-...> delivered on 20 February 2019. 5. The GNSO Council reviewed and discussed the recommendations of the EPDP Team (Recommendations) and approved<https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions/1999-2019#20190304-1> all Recommendations on 4 March 2019 by a GNSO Supermajority vote. 6. The GNSO Council vote exceeded the required voting threshold set forth in the ICANN Bylaws to impose new Consensus Policies on ICANN contracted parties. 7. The ICANN Board adopted the Recommendations for a new Consensus Policy on gTLD Registration Data as set forth in section 5 of the Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/epdp-gtld-...> in accordance with Sections A and B of the attached scorecard titled "Scorecard: EPDP Phase 1 Recommendations<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/epdp-scorecard-15may19-en.pdf>". 8. The ICANN Board directed the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to develop and execute an implementation plan for the adopted Recommendations that is consistent with the guidance provided by the GNSO Council. 9. Throughout the implementation phase, ICANN org, in cooperation with the GNSO Council Liaison to the Implementation Review Team (IRT), identified questions concerning the Recommendations, including areas for additional clarification and potential drafting errors. 10. During these discussions, former EPDP Team members, the GNSO Council Liaison to the IRT, and the GNSO Council acknowledged the unique circumstances involved in the Board’s adoption of the Temporary Specification and the narrow timeframe within which the EPDP Team had to produce theRecommendations. 11. In light of this truncated timeline, the GNSO Council acknowledges, in particular, that some of the Recommendations could have benefitted from further discussions and, accordingly, acknowledged that the Recommendations had some unintentional omissions and errors. 12. On 21 February 2024, ICANN org published the Registration Data Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registration-data-policy-2024-02-21-en> with an effective date of 21 August 2025. 13. On 8 August 2024, ICANN org informed the IRT that billing contact data must still be collected and retained pursuant to the current requirements in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement. 14. In response, some members of the IRT expressed the view that the absence in the Recommendations of a specific consensus policy recommendation to supersede and eliminate Registrar Accreditation Agreement requirements related to processing billing contact data was a drafting error, and that the EPDP Team intended for registrars’ collection of billing contact data to become optional and not mandatory. No IRT members expressed disagreement with this view. For the avoidance of doubt, the relevant sections of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement the IRT referenced include section 3.6 (as it relates to 3.4.1.3), 3.4.1.3, and 1.1.2 - 1.1.5 of the Data Retention Specification. 15. The GNSO Council acknowledges that the role of the GNSO Council during policy implementation is to “serve as a resource for staff who have questions about the background or intent of the policy recommendations during its implementation. The GNSO Council may continue to provide input on the implementation of a policy, for example, if the GNSO Council believes that the implementation is inconsistent with the policy.” 16. The GNSO Council also acknowledges that unless in conflict with or otherwise modified by a policy recommendation, current contractual requirements and consensus policy requirements remain in place following the implementation of a new ICANN Consensus Policy. 17. ICANN org asked the GNSO Council to provide guidance on whether the Recommendations were intended to supersede and eliminate the current Registrar Accreditation Agreement requirements for the collection, retention, and escrow of registrant billing contact data, and the GNSO Council discussed this topic during its meetings on 19 December 2024<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...>, 13 February 2025<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...>, and 12 March 2025<https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/gnsocouncilmeetings/pages/...>. 18. In its discussion, the GNSO Council agreed that the EPDP Team did intend to eliminate the requirement for registrars to collect and retain billing contact data under an ICANN purpose for processing; however, the GNSO Council acknowledged that there is no corresponding policy recommendation that states this. 19. The GNSO Council further acknowledges that it is not the role of the GNSO Council nor the IRT to create policy, as policy is created per the GNSO Policy Development Process in the ICANN Bylaws, Annex A<https://www.icann.org/en/governance/bylaws#annexA>. 20. The GNSO Council acknowledges that the EPDP Phase 1 Team was working under an exceptional timeline due to the Board’s adoption of a Temporary Specification (the first of its kind), and for that reason, the Recommendations fail to comprehensively capture the Working Group’s intent related to the collection and escrow of billing contact data. 21. With this exceptional circumstance in mind, the GNSO Council confirms that the EPDP Team intended to eliminate the current requirements in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement related to Billing Contact. This intention was demonstrated in the Final Report, which did not include a recommendation for registrars to collect and retain billing contact data and which was delivered pursuant to the EPDP Team Charter which directed the EPDP Team to consider the collection and retention of billing contact data. RESOLVED 1. The GNSO Council confirms its guidance to ICANN org that the EPDP Team did intend to modify the current Registrar Accreditation Agreement requirements related to billing contact, and the current RAA requirements for the collection, retention, and escrow of billing contact have been eliminated by the Registration Data Policy. For the avoidance of doubt, the modified sections include section 3.6 (as it relates to 3.4.1.3), 3.4.1.3, and 1.1.2 - 1.1.5 of the Data Retention Specification. 2. The GNSO Council confirms and commits that, going forward, it will be specified in Working Group Charters that if the Working Groups intend to modify a requirement within the Registry Agreement, Registrar Accreditation Agreement, or Consensus Policy via Consensus Policy recommendations, the policy recommendations must explicitly and specifically identify which requirements are intended to be modified and how such requirements are recommended to be modified per their Consensus Policy recommendations. 3. The GNSO Council requests GNSO Support Staff to inform the ICANN org Global Domain Services Team of this motion. Vote Results<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/vote-result/gnso-coun...> IPC Statement<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2025/presentation/ipc-stat...>