Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=>
Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM *To: *"Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Cc: *"'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
*ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019*
*Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List*
*Action Items:*
- None
*Item 3: Consent Agenda *
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
*Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report*
*Action items:*
- *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
*Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures*
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion*
*Action items:*
- *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
*Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy*
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS*
*12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=>* to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. *
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote*
*Action items:*
- *None*
*NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Andrea Glandon*
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
*Email:* andrea.glandon@icann.org
*Skype ID:* acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=>
See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_1434183782]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Flip et al, First of all what I mentioned in my email is the need to remove any org that might have conflict of interest. I would have loved for a discussion to happen on the list (which was my intention) regarding that issue, especially given I personally believe that if we are in search for independent and neutral arbitration orgs, we should be very careful with any type of bias. On another note, the wording as is right now says “such as” which would not entirely mark an exception of the orgs mentioned in our reply. But since you raised these questions on the list as you did, I’ll go ahead and express that WIPO is primarily an IP organization. If we want an arbitration process that is not biased and truly independent, we should not allow for any org that might have a slight subjective view and instead focus on primarily arbitration orgs. Given all of this, and given that it seems we might not get to a point where we would agree, I would encourage that we remove the names of any organization and instead say experts for now if any changes are to be made to the text. Even though, the conflict of interest seems quite obvious to me and even though the wording as is says “such as” and not “only”. Best, Elsa — On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:26 PM Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote:
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks,
Keith
*From:* council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Flip Petillion *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM *To:* Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S < elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[image: signature_1434183782] <http://www.petillion.law/>
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 *To: *Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards,
Julie
*From: *Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM *To: *Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Cc: *"Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa
—
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM *To: *"Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Cc: *"'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
*ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019*
*Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List*
*Action Items:*
- None
*Item 3: Consent Agenda *
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
*Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report*
*Action items:*
- *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
*Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures*
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion*
*Action items:*
- *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
*Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy*
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS*
*12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=>* to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. *
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote*
*Action items:*
- *None*
*NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Andrea Glandon*
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
*Email:* andrea.glandon@icann.org
*Skype ID:* acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=>
See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
--
Elsa Saade Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
I agree with Elsa that the most appropriate language would be to defer to "experts". It is not appropriate for us to mention by name any special interest groups, particularly that one. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, 5. October 2019 20:31, Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> wrote:
Flip et al,
First of all what I mentioned in my email is the need to remove any org that might have conflict of interest. I would have loved for a discussion to happen on the list (which was my intention) regarding that issue, especially given I personally believe that if we are in search for independent and neutral arbitration orgs, we should be very careful with any type of bias.
On another note, the wording as is right now says “such as” which would not entirely mark an exception of the orgs mentioned in our reply. But since you raised these questions on the list as you did, I’ll go ahead and express that WIPO is primarily an IP organization. If we want an arbitration process that is not biased and truly independent, we should not allow for any org that might have a slight subjective view and instead focus on primarily arbitration orgs.
Given all of this, and given that it seems we might not get to a point where we would agree, I would encourage that we remove the names of any organization and instead say experts for now if any changes are to be made to the text. Even though, the conflict of interest seems quite obvious to me and even though the wording as is says “such as” and not “only”.
Best,
Elsa —
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:26 PM Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote:
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks,
Keith
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact)[]. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
- We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or
- The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[signature_1434183782](http://www.petillion.law/)
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards,
Julie
From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa
—
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page [here](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=). If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019
Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List
Action Items:
- None
Item 3: Consent Agenda
Action items:
- None
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs
Action items:
- Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019.
- Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps
Action items:
- Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report
Action items:
- Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures
Action items:
- None
Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion
Action items:
- PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1 - [Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=) to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures.
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote
Action items:
- None
NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework
Action items:
- Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Andrea Glandon
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org
Skype ID: acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: [https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=)
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: [https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=)
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the [GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=)
See All SO and AC events on the [ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=)
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=)) and the website Terms of Service ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=)). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
--
Elsa Saade Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-- --
Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_2376235]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org" <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com" <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> [signature_1434183782]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> wrote:
Hi Keith,
All,
I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes.
Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process.
As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.”
In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions.
I await the doodle invite.
Best regards,
Flip
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[signature_2376235](http://www.petillion.law/)
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org" <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com" <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks,
Keith
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact)[]. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
- We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or
- The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[signature_1434183782](http://www.petillion.law/)
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards,
Julie
From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa
—
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page [here](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=). If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019
Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List
Action Items:
- None
Item 3: Consent Agenda
Action items:
- None
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs
Action items:
- Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019.
- Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps
Action items:
- Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report
Action items:
- Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures
Action items:
- None
Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion
Action items:
- PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1 - [Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=) to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures.
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote
Action items:
- None
NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework
Action items:
- Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Andrea Glandon
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org
Skype ID: acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: [https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=)
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: [https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=)
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the [GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=)
See All SO and AC events on the [ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=)
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=)) and the website Terms of Service ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=)). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
--
Elsa Saade Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Dear councillors, I agree that this should go through the mailing list instead of going through a small group. I fully support Elsa's ad Ayden's points about not mentioning specific organisations that have a conflict of interest. This issue is too important to be decided between the leadership and two members of the drafting team who have a disagreement on this issue. Warm regards, Tatiana On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 18:11, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
Dear all,
May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks!
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> wrote:
Hi Keith,
All,
I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes.
Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process.
As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.”
In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions.
I await the doodle invite.
Best regards,
Flip
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[image: signature_2376235] <http://www.petillion.law/>
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
*From: *"Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> *Date: *Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 *To: *Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org" <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com" <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks,
Keith
*From:* council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Flip Petillion *Sent:* Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM *To:* Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S < elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
[image: signature_1434183782] <http://www.petillion.law/>
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 *To: *Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards,
Julie
*From: *Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM *To: *Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> *Cc: *"Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa
—
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by *Monday, 30 September 2019* according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> *Date: *Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM *To: *"Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> *Cc: *"'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> *Subject: *[council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
*ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019*
*Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List*
*Action Items:*
- None
*Item 3: Consent Agenda *
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors *to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. - *Council leadership* to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
*Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report*
*Action items:*
- *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
*Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *7 October 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures*
*Action items:*
- None
*Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion*
*Action items:*
- *PDP 3.0* team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
*Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy*
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)*
*Action items:*
- *Councilors* to provide input by *30 September 2019*. *Small team* to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
*Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS*
*12.1 - **Draft GNSO Council letter* [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=>* to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. *
*Action items:*
- *Council leadership* to send letter to ICANN Board.
*12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote*
*Action items:*
- *None*
*NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework*
*Action items:*
- *Council* to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. - *ICANN Staff *to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
*Andrea Glandon*
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
*Email:* andrea.glandon@icann.org
*Skype ID:* acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=>
See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
--
Elsa Saade Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com>; julie.hedlund@icann.org; elsa.saade@gmail.com; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Thanks Keith, I think we should keep the sentence much simpler: "ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations." I see no reason to go into further detail than that, and I do not support the inclusion of language which prioritizes the input of those who have already worked or been consulted on IRPs before. The arbitration bodies that began working with ICANN a decade or more ago were chosen based upon a criteria that was a product of its time. They are not necessarily bodies that should or would be chosen today. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 22:38, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue?
A few observations:
- It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. - I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. - It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration.
Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points:
“ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.”
Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up.
Thanks,
Keith
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com>; julie.hedlund@icann.org; elsa.saade@gmail.com; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear all,
May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks!
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> wrote:
Hi Keith,
All,
I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes.
Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process.
As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.”
In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions.
I await the doodle invite.
Best regards,
Flip
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org" <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com" <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks,
Keith
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact)[]. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
- We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or - The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion
fpetillion@petillion.law
+32484652653
www.petillion.law
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards,
Julie
From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa
—
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions.
Kind regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page [here](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=). If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019
Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List
Action Items:
- None
Item 3: Consent Agenda
Action items:
- None
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs
Action items:
- Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019.
- Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps
Action items:
- Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report
Action items:
- Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures
Action items:
- None
Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion
Action items:
- PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items:
- Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1 - [Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=) to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures.
Action items:
- Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote
Action items:
- None
NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework
Action items:
- Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period.
- ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Andrea Glandon
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org
Skype ID: acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: [https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=)
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: [https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=)
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the [GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=)
See All SO and AC events on the [ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=)
_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council@gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=)) and the website Terms of Service ([https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=)). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
--
Elsa Saade
Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
Keith I like your suggested text Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com" <icann@ferdeline.com>, "fpetillion@petillion.law" <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com>; julie.hedlund@icann.org; elsa.saade@gmail.com; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> [signature_2376235]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> [signature_1434183782]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
+1 Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)
On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Keith
I like your suggested text
Regards
Michele
-- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/> http://blacknight.blog/ <http://blacknight.blog/> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/> ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com <mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>" <icann@ferdeline.com <mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>>, "fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>" <fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi all,
Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue?
A few observations:
It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration.
Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points:
“ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.”
Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up.
Thanks, Keith
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com <mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>; council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear all,
May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks!
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote:
Hi Keith, All,
I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes.
Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process.
As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.”
In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions.
I await the doodle invite.
Best regards,
Flip
Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law <http://www.petillion.law/>
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com <mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks, Keith
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact) <>. I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law <mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law <http://www.petillion.law/>
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards, Julie
From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com <mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa —
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions.
Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org <mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019
Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List
Action Items: None
Item 3: Consent Agenda
Action items: None
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs
Action items: Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps
Action items: Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report
Action items: Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures
Action items: None
Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion
Action items: PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy
Action items: Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures.
Action items: Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote
Action items: None
NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework
Action items: Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Andrea Glandon
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org <mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- --
Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
+1 Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com> wrote:
+1
Sincerely Yours,
Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID
Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow)
On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Keith
I like your suggested text
Regards
Michele
-- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com" <icann@ferdeline.com>, "fpetillion@petillion.law" <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi all,
Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue?
A few observations:
It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration.
Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points:
“ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.”
Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up.
Thanks, Keith
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com>; julie.hedlund@icann.org; elsa.saade@gmail.com; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear all,
May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks!
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> wrote:
Hi Keith, All,
I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes.
Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process.
As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.”
In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions.
I await the doodle invite.
Best regards,
Flip
Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org" <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com" <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Flip,
Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week.
Thanks, Keith
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>; Council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
All:
Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned).
I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question.
So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context?
Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities.
In order to rectify this situation, I see two options:
We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or The objection could be withdrawn.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Flip
P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions.
Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law
Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com>, "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Dear Elsa and Councilors,
As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly.
Kind regards, Julie
From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Hi Julie,
Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.
Best,
Elsa —
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote: Dear Councilors,
Per the action items below, please note in particular this one:
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions.
Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org'" <gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019
Dear Councilors,
Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019.
Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items.
Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below.
ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019
Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List
Action Items: None
Item 3: Consent Agenda
Action items: None
Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs
Action items: Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter.
Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps
Action items: Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report
Action items: Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review.
Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org.
Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures
Action items: None
Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion
Action items: PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited.
Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy
Action items: Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board.
Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT)
Action items: Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org.
Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org] to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures.
Action items: Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote
Action items: None
NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework
Action items: Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team.
Andrea Glandon
GNSO SO/AC Support
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org
Skype ID: acglandon76
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org] Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com] Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org] See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- --
Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks for the feedback. Flip, would my proposed language be acceptable to you as a compromise? Regards, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Erika Mann Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 6:46 AM To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com> Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) +1 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> wrote: Keith I like your suggested text Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>" <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>>, "fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>" <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Keith, It is acceptable to me. Thank you. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law +32484652653 www.petillion.law [signature_304242091]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org> Reply to: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com> Date: Tuesday, 8 October 2019 at 16:22 To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Thanks for the feedback. Flip, would my proposed language be acceptable to you as a compromise? Regards, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Erika Mann Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 6:46 AM To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com> Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) +1 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> wrote: Keith I like your suggested text Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>" <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>>, "fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>" <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> [signature_2376235]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> [signature_1434183782]<http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thank you, Flip. Best, Keith From: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 12:59 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com>; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Keith, It is acceptable to me. Thank you. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Tuesday, 8 October 2019 at 16:22 To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Thanks for the feedback. Flip, would my proposed language be acceptable to you as a compromise? Regards, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Erika Mann Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 6:46 AM To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> Cc: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) +1 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> wrote: Keith I like your suggested text Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>" <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>>, "fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>" <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
All, Attached is the final version of the Council’s response to the IRP-IOT questions. Thanks to all for the input and willingness to compromise. Julie, please deliver this to ICANN legal and advise them it replaces the previous version submitted last week. Best, Keith From: Drazek, Keith Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 1:01 PM To: 'fpetillion@petillion.law' <fpetillion@petillion.law>; 'council@gnso.icann.org' <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Thank you, Flip. Best, Keith From: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 12:59 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Keith, It is acceptable to me. Thank you. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Tuesday, 8 October 2019 at 16:22 To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Thanks for the feedback. Flip, would my proposed language be acceptable to you as a compromise? Regards, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Erika Mann Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 6:46 AM To: Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> Cc: council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) +1 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:19 PM, Maxim Alzoba <m.alzoba@gmail.com<mailto:m.alzoba@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Sincerely Yours, Maxim Alzoba Special projects manager, International Relations Department, FAITID Current UTC offset: +3.00 (.Moscow) On 8 Oct 2019, at 13:15, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> wrote: Keith I like your suggested text Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Reply to: Keith Drazek <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Monday 7 October 2019 at 21:39 To: "icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>" <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>>, "fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>" <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi all, Would anyone else like to weigh in on this issue? A few observations: * It seems our goal here as the GNSO Council is to acknowledge that ICANN can and should be able to seek expert advice/input on IRPs. * I don’t see an inherent conflict of interest for any group in sharing its expertise, and generally if a conflict were to be identified, it would be done on a case-by-case basis. * It’s not clear to me that we need to list any specific entities, or single any organization out, but we should signal that current experts and other experts should be eligible for consideration. Here’s some proposed text that should address the above points: “ICANN should consider taking advice from appropriate and objective outside expert organizations that are well-versed in international arbitration – ICANN could consider sourcing such advice from organizations with which it has worked/consulted on IRP before, as well as any other such organization that it deems suitable to the task.” Thoughts? We need to try to wrap this up. Thanks, Keith From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2019 12:11 PM To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> Cc: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear all, May I propose that the discussion on this point, if it even need continue, please continue on this mailing list and that a separate call not be scheduled? I think it is important that all members of the Council - and not just a small, select group - are able to input into this important conversation. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, 7. October 2019 17:25, Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>> wrote: Hi Keith, All, I still don’t read any substantiation in support of the allegations. WIPO would not manage any IRPs but would merely stand ready to assist any ICANN request for information on ADR generally and/or potential expert/arbitrator selection processes. Moreover, you may recall that IP is embedded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the United Nations Declaration for the Right of Indigenous People (UNDRIP). I believe it makes sense to have a diverse list of dispute resolution providers and to avoid any type of bias by making a narrow selection before even starting the process. As to WIPO, it is “the global forum for IP services, policy, information and cooperation [whose] mission is to lead the development of a balanced and effective international IP system that enables innovation and creativity for the benefit of all.” In my opinion, the list should include ICC, ICDR and WIPO as current and past service providers of ICANN, and leave the option open to consult other institutions. I await the doodle invite. Best regards, Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Date: Friday, 4 October 2019 at 21:26 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>" <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>, "elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: RE: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Flip, Thanks for your email. I did not realize that there was a disagreement within the drafting team (you and Elsa) on the point concerning the removal of WIPO, prior to her request to remove it, and the finalization of the comment. I will ask staff to set up a call among the leadership team and the two of you for next week so we can try to resolve this. Please watch for a doodle poll. We have also notified Samantha Eisner that we may need to retract the current statement and will provide her an update next week. Thanks, Keith From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Flip Petillion Sent: Friday, October 04, 2019 11:20 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>; Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) All: Thank you for reviewing the proposed text and for the feedback presented. However, I am compelled to formally object to the proposal to remove WIPO as an expert due to a conflict of interest. To my knowledge, this conflict has never been adequately explained or justified; nor has it been discussed (neither with nor without the involvement of the parties concerned). I had objected to this change before the text was submitted and that objection went unheeded. As we are a working group of 2 and there is an absence of consensus (in accordance with the GNSO Operating Procedures), the appropriate course of action is for Council to discuss and determine the disposition of the question. So far, I have only read a vague suggestion of ‘removing those [institutions] with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ This is a rather serious accusation that has no apparent basis (and yet has a material impact). I would therefore urge caution in removing a source that is clearly a world expert in this area. Compounding the matter, I am not aware of anyone following up on this suggestion at this point. No organisation was identified as having a ‘conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP.’ No explanation has been given as to the existence of an actual conflict of interest. Furthermore, it is unclear what was meant by ‘the nature of an IRP’ in this context? Therefore, I see no justification in removing a single dispute resolution provider like WIPO from the list of institutions that may be consulted with a view to preparing a standing panel. WIPO is an internationally-recognized institution which duly reports to its Member States (its annual Assemblies are in fact occurring this week), has neutrally and impartially operated the UDRP (covering 45,000 cases) for more than twenty (20) years now to the benefit of all ICANN stakeholders, which is trusted by over seventy-five (75) national registries for their policy and case expertise, and which has moreover led the way for ICANN in managing the LRO pre-delegation disputes process. Furthermore, I see no basis for ICANN staff to decide unilaterally to remove a provider from the list in a communication that is supposed to be prepared by the GNSO Council and for which I hold leadership responsibilities. In order to rectify this situation, I see two options: 1. We revert back to the original text and, if necessary, have council debate on the subject; or 2. The objection could be withdrawn. Thank you. Kind regards, Flip P.S.: That said, I would suggest an additional change: that the GNSO Council consider removing the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) from the list, albeit for reasons unrelated to the subject above. To my knowledge, ICANN has not previously engaged with the PCA. Asking them to assist now may seem inappropriate unless we can provide compelling reasons to the contrary. As far as I am aware, ICANN has not had any intention to rely on PCA’s services, nor has it such intention for the future. During the last council meeting, I did make this suggestion, but I am not aware of any subsequent actions. Flip Petillion fpetillion@petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law/> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 16:52 To: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>>, "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Dear Elsa and Councilors, As the deadline for comments ended yesterday, 30 September, and Elsa’s suggestion below is the only comment received, please see the attached final version of the response reflecting the minor change suggested by Elsa. This response will be delivered shortly. Kind regards, Julie From: Elsa S <elsa.saade@gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 9:12 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Action Item: Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Hi Julie, Thanks for resending this out! I just wanted to draw attention to the external expertise mentioned in the text, and would suggest removing those with conflict of interest given the nature of an IRP. Best, Elsa — On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:17 AM Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Councilors, Per the action items below, please note in particular this one: Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. With respect to this item please review the attached draft response and provide input, if any, by Monday, 30 September 2019 according to the actions. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Andrea Glandon <andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 8:22 PM To: "Council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:Council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Cc: "'gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>'" <gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>> Subject: [council] Action Items: GNSO Council meeting 19 September 2019 Dear Councilors, Please find the action items, as stated during the meeting, from the GNSO Council call held on 19 September 2019. Please ensure your wiki logins are up to date as all Action Items have been assigned to councilors and/or staff and posted on the Action Item wiki page here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_RgZlAg&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=3-hGIGNPG_MVccHXahT9lk8qFDbuDuo_wwbRzKZZQGg&s=do3fZzjIln0Jwcx8qKogeUnOo6PFhu4TNs9Q0S7YzIs&e=>. If you are logged into the wiki when you go to that page, your name will be highlighted alongside the action item assigned to you. Please refer to this page for the recent status updates on the Action items. Please note that actions for all councilors are highlighted below. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEP 2019 Item 2. Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action Items List Action Items: * None Item 3: Consent Agenda Action items: * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Board referrals of CCT-RT recommendations to GNSO Council and GNSO PDP WGs Action items: * Councilors to review and send comments, if applicable, by 26 September 2019. * Council leadership to subsequently draft cover letter and send response to the ICANN Board, shortly thereafter. Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Discussion of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Policy Status Report and Council next steps Action items: * Council to convene a small focused drafting team (e.g., like the IDN Scoping Team) to review several items, including at least the review of the ICANN Policy Status Report, considering the possibility of policy development mechanisms, and the form of authorization (FOA) issues. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Draft Amendments to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report Action items: * Small team to address Councilors’ feedback (e.g., language about new recommendations superseding recommendations 1-4, ensuring technical expertise is available, and team composition) and deliver a revised draft by 27 September for Council review. After Council approval, send to the GAC/IGOs for their review. Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – ICANN Org’s Request for Clarification on Data Accuracy and Phase-2 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 7 October 2019. Small team to address Councilors’ feedback and complete revised draft for Council review and approval for sending to ICANN org. Item 8: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - EPDP P1 Recommendation 27: ICANN Org’s Assessment of Impact From GDPR on Existing Policies / Procedures Action items: * None Item 9 - PDP 3.0 Small Group Update/Discussion Action items: * PDP 3.0 team to consider how input from outside the GNSO can be solicited. Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to the Verisign Request to Defer Enforcement of the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Draft Response to Questions on the Independent Review Process Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) Action items: * Councilors to provide input by 30 September 2019. Small team to address Councilors feedback, if applicable, and complete revised draft for sending to ICANN org. Item 12: ANY OTHER BUSINESS 12.1 - Draft GNSO Council letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_gnso-2Dcouncil-2Dto-2Dicann-2Dboard-2D13sep19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=i9lKVPogIFc9wMxzTAhK0c5W76B9uenIwV2XvbM6IUM&e=> to the ICANN Board regarding potential dependencies between the Name Collisions Analysis Project (NCAP) and New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. Action items: * Council leadership to send letter to ICANN Board. 12.2 - Approval of the 2019 slate of Members and Liaisons on the Customer Standing Committee (CSC) - possible email vote Action items: * None NEW: 12.3 - Invitation to Provide Feedback on the ICANN Board’s Proposed Public Interest Framework Action items: * Council to convene a small drafting team to formulate a response to the public comment period. * ICANN Staff to circulate call for volunteers to form small drafting team. Andrea Glandon GNSO SO/AC Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: andrea.glandon@icann.org<mailto:andrea.glandon@icann.org> Skype ID: acglandon76 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ [learn.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=wzIcuBNsTyK_-aJaQlHE3GJd912842EagkY1lxr5Dys&s=kf1KBrkjy3HBF5KYAke_olPEzshzODyedOSeT19RtlA&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global Calendar [features.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__features.icann.org_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=JIuCi8FdVCOcC7bOAMWYU065PkC8Q_asOphTPPe8jeQ&e=> _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=x5OUMJhndbHWh9-PqG55E8KK5C3Ehl7GFl6SXpo5fW4&e=>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=VuQBkBlMG1KsrVNDg59TVqHmNSZz9P8aatqCz72nklM&s=h1BBbfjoieUnV0ND7UdLDaax9prDv8WYoFIaoJYR-1Q&e=>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- -- Elsa Saade Consultant Gulf Centre for Human Rights Twitter: @Elsa_Saade _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (9)
-
Ayden Férdeline -
Drazek, Keith -
Elsa S -
Erika Mann -
Flip Petillion -
Julie Hedlund -
Maxim Alzoba -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Tatiana Tropina