Dear All, Ahead of the official GNSO Council minutes, the following motions were passed at the Council meeting on 9 June 2011. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Motion 1. WHOIS Registrant Identification Study Motion May 2011 Whereas: In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and objective understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/). On 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council requested Staff to conduct research on feasibility and cost estimates for selected Whois studies and report its findings to Council. (See Motion 3, http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200903). On 23-Mar-2010, Staff presented a report on the feasibility and cost estimates for a Whois "Registrant Identification" Study, finding that the study would cost approximately $150,000 (USD) and take approximately one year to complete (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en....). This exploratory study would examine Whois data for a representative sample of gTLD domain names to classify the types of entities that register domains, including natural persons, various kinds of legal persons and Privacy and Proxy service providers. On 28 April 2011 the Council deferred consideration of the Whois Registrant Identification Study until the 9 June 2011 meeting and requested that any applicable motions in that regard be submitted not later than 1 June 2011. On 20 May 2011 a volunteer Whois studies group submitted to the GNSO Council revised Whois Registrant Identification Study Terms of Reference http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may11-e... supporting Rationale http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-registrant-id-study-rationale-20may... and Summary of Changes http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/summary-changes-whois-registrant-id-study... Resolved; The Council requests that ICANN staff proceed with the Whois Registrant Identification Study as set forth in the revised Terms of Reference http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may11-e... Further resolved, the Council asks staff to report back to the Council if the original estimate for the study of $150,000 USD is exceeded by greater than 20%. Further resolved, in recognition of the substantial amount of coordination needed to direct the research, that staff be given the discretion to manage this study serially or in parallel with the other Whois studies, with a goal of expediting completion of all of the studies as efficiently as possible. Motion 2: To Acknowledge the Receipt of the Policy Development Process Work Team Final Report and Initiate a Public Comment Period WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO Council Improvement Implementation Plan; (http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implement...) for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182) (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm); WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement the improvements; WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT), which was chartered to develop a new policy development process that incorporates a working group approach and makes it more effective and responsive to ICANN's policy development needs; WHEREAS, the GNSO Council decided to terminate the PPSC on 28 April 2011 and instructed the PDP-WT to deliver its Final Report directly to the GNSO Council; WHEREAS, the PDP-WT submitted its Final Report, http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-31may11-en.htm, on 31 May 2011 to the GNSO Council; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the PDP-WT Final Report as delivered by the PDP-WT and directs ICANN Staff to commence a thirty (30) day public comment period on this Final Report. RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the PDP-WT Final Report as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period. RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a concise summary of the new Policy Development Process be drafted by ICANN Staff, following approval of the new PDP by the ICANN Board, in order to serve as a primer to the new Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws and PDP Manual for potential PDP WG members. 3 Motion regarding the JAS milestone report. Whereas: The GNSO Council and ALAC established the Joint SO/AC Working Group (JASWG) on support for new gTLD applicants in April of 2010; and The Working Group released it Milestone Report posted for consideration by the Board, Chartering Organizations and at-large Community. This report documented the completion of work as defined in the original charter and requested an update to the Working Groups charter, and The GNSO and ALAC, separately, renewed the Working Groups charter with additional work item in February 2011, and The Joint SO/AC Working Group received and discussed the public comments, and The Joint SO/AC Working Group has completed the work as defined in its extended charter and published a second milestone report (https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/JAS+Issues+and+Recommendations#) on 8 May 2011 covering those chartered items (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20110113-1) entitled JAS Milestone Report. and The GNSO council does not wish to delay the start of the new gTLD application process, and The GNSO council does not wish to delay implementation of support programs for applicants from developing regions, Resolved: The GNSO Council thanks the members of the Joint SO/AC Working Group for its efforts and its dedication to completing the work on such a tight schedule, and The GNSO Council request that the report be put out for community review as soon as possible, The JAS Working Group continues working to deal with any issues that may arise in the upcoming review by the community, That the JAS Working group publish their final report after this review process. Resolved further, that the GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Chair to communicate its decision to the ALAC Chair. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org