Hi,

I think we have to accept that we voted on the text that was listed at the time of the vote.

To go beyond, and I know I was not one of those who voted for this motion, I have a lot of trouble imagining that we can complete 1 and 2 by mid February, let alone 3 and 4 as well.

While I am not suggesting we stall this effort, I do believe that we need to take the time to behave deliberately and judiciously.  As for doing a proper study, my experience in the design social studies suggests that we would be hard pressed to design a proper study by Mid February even if we already know the answers to 1 and 2 today.

As for Ross's amendment detailing an extra step in the sequence, I will go through the transcript for confirmation, but I do not believe that the amendment was every formally accepted into the motion.  In any case, it seems to me, that doing this is a rational prerequisite to 

1) Council shall provide 
additional definition regarding the potential data gathering 
and study requirements 

I, personally, do not see how we can do this without first deciding on the policy issues that need work as the definitions of study requirements  will be too broad without doing this as we already saw in Saturday's meeting.  Perhaps we don't need a new motion in order to proceed with the work in a deliberate and careful manner.  If we do, ok.

thanks
a.





On 31 okt 2007, at 16.39, Gomes, Chuck wrote:


Glen - I believe it is incorrect to say that motion 1 (IGO DRP PDP) was passed.  Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

Councilors - In our rush to get Resolution 4 (Whois) done, I think there are two things we missed: 1) the 15 February deadline should have been put at the end of item 3 of of resolution paragraph 3; 2) as requested by Ross without any objection by others as far as I can recall, we should have included identification of policy issues as the first step in the sequentional action items so that it should have said the following:

"3.  Recognizes the demand for future policy development including, but not limited to, ensuring appropriate privacy safeguards for natural persons, lawful access to data for rights enforcement, consumer protection, law enforcement and anti-crime purposes and will immediately initiate the following sequential actions:  1) Council shall identify the policy issues that need additional work; 2)Council shall provide additional definition regarding the potential data gathering and study requirements, 3) staff shall provide the Council with rough cost estimates for various components of data gathering and studies, 4) the Council will decide what data gathering and studies would be pursued; and 5) staff will perform the resulting data gathering and studies and report the results back to the Council; actions 1) through 4) should be completed no later than 15 February 2008" 

My guess is that if we want to make the changes I noted above, that we would have to act on the modified motion at our next meeting.

Chuck Gomes

"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org 
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of 
GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 6:33 PM
To: 'Council GNSO'
Subject: [council] GNSO Council resolutions 31 October 2007


Dear Council Members,

Ahead of the complete minutes, please find the resolutions 
that were passed by the GNSO Council Open Meeting in LA on 
Wednesday 31 October 2007.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you.
Kind regards,

Glen
--------------------------------------------------------------
GNSO Council Open Meeting in LA agenda
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-31oct07.shtml
also see: http://losangeles2007.icann.org/node/61

Resolution 1

Whereas, the Council has previously requested and received 
both the 15 June 2007 "GNSO Issues Report on Dispute Handling 
for IGO Names and Abbreviations"
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/igo-names/issues-report-igo-drp-1
5jun07.pdf
  and the 28 September 2007 "Staff Report on Draft IGO Domain 
Name Dispute Resolution Procedure;"
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-igo-drp-report-v2-28sep07.pdf
and

Whereas, the Council believes that further work on the draft 
IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure is appropriate 
before voting on whether to initiate a policy development 
process on this issue; and

Whereas, the Intellectual Property Constituency is willing to 
lead a small ad hoc group to review and consider a proposed 
draft dispute resolution procedure,

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Council authorizes 
the creation of a small ad hoc group of interested informed 
and representative stakeholders and members of the GAC to 
review, consider and propose as appropriate revisions to the 
Draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure set forth 
in the Staff Report, and instructs the ad hoc group to report 
to the Council with its recommendations not later than 15 
February 2008.

Resolution 2.

Whereas the issues report on Domain Tasting 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/gnso-domain-tastin
g-report-14jun07.pdf
has been released and discussed
  and
Whereas, the GNSO Council acknowledges the Final Outcomes 
Report of the ad hoc group on Domain Tasting, 
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-domain-tasting-adhoc-outcome
s-report-final.pdf
the Council hereby initiates a Policy Development Process, 
and pursuant to Sections 4 and 8 of Annex A of the Bylaws,

The GNSO council resolves to initiate a PDP to address the 
issues set forth in the Issues Report by Staff and in the 
Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group and encourages staff to 
apply ICANN's fee collections to names registered and 
subsequently deregistered during the add-grace period.

Resolution 3.

Whereas, the GNSO Council has resolved to initiate a Policy 
Development Process on Domain Tasting, and pursuant to 
Sections 4 and 8 of Annex A of the Bylaws, resolves as follows:

1.     To request that each constituency appoint a representative to 
solicit the constituency's views on the issues presented in 
the Issues Report by Staff and in the Outcomes Report of the 
ad hoc group.  Each such representative is asked to submit a 
Constituency Statement to the ICANN  staff manager within 
thirty-five (35) calendar days of this resolution.
2.     To request that ICANN Staff take all Constituency 
Statements, the 
two prior reports, and other information and compile (and 
post on the Comment Site) an Initial Report within fifty (50) 
calendar days of this resolution.
3.     Thereafter, the PDP shall follow the provisions of Item 9 of 
Annex A of the Bylaws, in creating a Final Report for Council.

Resolution 4.

WHEREAS;
1. The GNSO Council has recently received the Whois Working 
Group final report 
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/icann-whois-wg-report-final-1-9.pdf
and;

2. The GNSO Council acknowledges that the broad range of 
stakeholders with interests in this issue has lead to a wide 
range of views of what the policy issues are and how to best 
address those policy issues with solutions that can be 
supported by the consensus of the community, and;

3. The GNSO Council observes that the Working Group failed to 
reach agreement on several of the key issues identified in 
the charter of the Working Group, 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/whois-wg/whois-work
ing-group-charter-16apr07.pdf
and;

4. That broadly, the scope of the issues in this area have 
evolved substantially over the term of this Policy 
Development Process since it was originally chartered, and;

5. A comprehensive, objective and quantifiable understanding 
of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system will 
benefit future GNSO policy development efforts, and;

6. The rights and requirements of natural persons, the legal 
and business communities, anti-crime and law enforcement and 
registrars in the areas of privacy, access, enforcement, 
investigation, consumer protection and research would benefit 
from future policy development by the GNSO.

THEREFORE, Be it resolved that the GNSO Council; 1. Sincerely 
thanks all of the volunteers, advisors, consultants, staff, 
stakeholders, observers and constituency participants who 
have contributed to the GNSO's examination of Whois policy 
over the last four years, and;

2. Formally ends the Policy Development Process on gTLD Whois 
without making any recommendations for specific policy 
changes to ICANN's Board of Directors, and;

3.  Recognizes the demand for future policy development 
including, but not limited to, ensuring appropriate privacy 
safeguards for natural persons, lawful access to data for 
rights enforcement, consumer protection, law enforcement and 
anti-crime purposes and will immediately initiate the 
following sequential actions:  1) Council shall provide 
additional definition regarding the potential data gathering 
and study requirements  2) staff shall provide the Council 
with rough cost estimates for various components of data 
gathering and studies no later than February 15th, 2008;; 3) 
the Council will decide what data gathering and studies would 
be pursued; and 4) staff will perform the resulting data 
gathering and studies and report the results back to the Council .

4. May initiate policy development activities in this area, 
as supported by the findings of the data-gathering and study  
activities upon their completion.

Resolution 5

Whereas Dr Liz Williams, as Senior Policy Counselor for 
ICANN, has been the ICANN Staff Manager assigned to support 
the GNSO's Policy Development Process (PDP) on new gTLDs, 
since December 2005.

Whereas this PDP trialled a number of new approaches in GNSO 
policy development, including the use of inter-sessional 
face-to-face meetings, calls for formal papers with the 
ability for the authors to present those papers and have 
dialog with the committee, and the use of working groups to 
analyse topics such as IDNs, reserved names, and protecting
the rights of others.    The success of the working groups became the
foundation of the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review 
Working Group recommendations on using working groups as the 
main approach for policy development.

Whereas Liz worked tirelessly to secure support for many of 
these initiatives, and pull together a huge amount of public 
input, meeting transcripts, and GNSO constituency 
contributions into a final set of principles, 
recommendations, and guidelines, along with a large range of 
supporting material that will assist the ICANN staff in 
implementing the policy.

Whereas Liz completed the final report on the policy for new 
gTLDs in August 2007, finished her term of office with ICANN 
in September 2007.

It is resolved that the GNSO expresses its sincere gratitude 
for her service to the ICANN community and wishes her every 
success in her next endeavours.
--
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org