Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi, As part of tomorrow's meeting, we have two motions, with one amendment on the agenda after the gTLD decision. I have enclosed those in this email for reference. Both of these were originally proposed a week before the meeting or more. thank a. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- Proposed Motion on GA mailing list rules (submitted 25 Aug) ---- Whereas the GA list sent a request to the GNSO council for approval of its new list rules, and whereas the GNSO council is responsible for managing open forums, in the form of mailing lists, and the GA list is one such open forum, Resolved: The GNSO chair will send a message to the GA List stating the following: The GNSO council acknowledges the GA List's charter request and thanks the particpants for consulting with the GNSO council on this issue. Given the council's by-law responsibilities for the moderation of the GA list, the council encourages the GA List's movement toward self moderation and supports the GA List in implementing the mailing list rules (found at http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm) indicated in Section 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with the following exception in section 2:
The Announce list is available for official pronouncements only. Emanating from the Secretariat of the NC and/or the Chair of the GA
The Announce list is and should remain solely for the sole use of the GNSO Secretariat for notifying the subscribers of GNSO and other ICANN informational items. With regard to the organizational sections of the charter, specifically sections 6, 8, and 9, the GNSO council accepts that members participating the list are free to determine their own organizational structure, with the following exceptions in section 8 on elections:
An election is usually held near the end of the term of office for the chair of the General Assembly. The exact time is decided by the outgoing Chair and the Chair of the GNSO.
The GNSO council, and its chair, cannot accept any responsibility for the internal governance of an organizational movement on the GA List at this time and restricts the council's actions to issues concerning the moderation of the GA List as determined by the by-laws. --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed motion for end process for Whois TF and WG to be voted on September 6 2007 (proposed Aug 30) --------------------------------------------------------- Whereas the Whois Task force report has not yet been voted on as required by the by-laws, Whereas the Whois WG was created to collect further information as defined in its terms of reference, Whereas the Whois WG has now completed its work, Whereas almost 6 months have gone by since the release of the Whois Task force report, Resolved: A - The GNSO council acknowledges the report and thanks the members and the chair of the Working group for their efforts. B - The GNSO Council should now complete this work on Whois and make its report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board. C - In order to complete the work the following steps will be taken as scheduled: 1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process. 2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically (Quote from by-laws) 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following: (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue; (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members; (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views; (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and (v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy. (end Quote) Final Date for for updated statement: October 4, 2007 which is 35 days from the meeting when the Whois WG report was discussed 3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments into the Final Report by October 11, 2007 4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15 5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007 6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting 7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007 --------------------------- Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion: - that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007" - that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with "during the LA Public Meeting".
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion. Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative. Kind regards, Mike Rodenbaugh Sr. Legal Director Yahoo! Inc. NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 3:30 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007 Hi, As part of tomorrow's meeting, we have two motions, with one amendment on the agenda after the gTLD decision. I have enclosed those in this email for reference. Both of these were originally proposed a week before the meeting or more. thank a. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- Proposed Motion on GA mailing list rules (submitted 25 Aug) ---- Whereas the GA list sent a request to the GNSO council for approval of its new list rules, and whereas the GNSO council is responsible for managing open forums, in the form of mailing lists, and the GA list is one such open forum, Resolved: The GNSO chair will send a message to the GA List stating the following: The GNSO council acknowledges the GA List's charter request and thanks the particpants for consulting with the GNSO council on this issue. Given the council's by-law responsibilities for the moderation of the GA list, the council encourages the GA List's movement toward self moderation and supports the GA List in implementing the mailing list rules (found at http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm) indicated in Section 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with the following exception in section 2:
The Announce list is available for official pronouncements only. Emanating from the Secretariat of the NC and/or the Chair of the GA
The Announce list is and should remain solely for the sole use of the GNSO Secretariat for notifying the subscribers of GNSO and other ICANN informational items. With regard to the organizational sections of the charter, specifically sections 6, 8, and 9, the GNSO council accepts that members participating the list are free to determine their own organizational structure, with the following exceptions in section 8 on elections:
An election is usually held near the end of the term of office for the chair of the General Assembly. The exact time is decided by the outgoing Chair and the Chair of the GNSO.
The GNSO council, and its chair, cannot accept any responsibility for the internal governance of an organizational movement on the GA List at this time and restricts the council's actions to issues concerning the moderation of the GA List as determined by the by-laws. --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed motion for end process for Whois TF and WG to be voted on September 6 2007 (proposed Aug 30) --------------------------------------------------------- Whereas the Whois Task force report has not yet been voted on as required by the by-laws, Whereas the Whois WG was created to collect further information as defined in its terms of reference, Whereas the Whois WG has now completed its work, Whereas almost 6 months have gone by since the release of the Whois Task force report, Resolved: A - The GNSO council acknowledges the report and thanks the members and the chair of the Working group for their efforts. B - The GNSO Council should now complete this work on Whois and make its report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board. C - In order to complete the work the following steps will be taken as scheduled: 1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process. 2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically (Quote from by-laws) 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following: (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue; (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members; (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views; (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and (v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy. (end Quote) Final Date for for updated statement: October 4, 2007 which is 35 days from the meeting when the Whois WG report was discussed 3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments into the Final Report by October 11, 2007 4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15 5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007 6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting 7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007 --------------------------- Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion: - that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007" - that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with "during the LA Public Meeting".
Is it just me or should the 2nd 'whereas' be the 1st 'resolved'? Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 8:09 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 3:30 PM To: GNSO Council Subject: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi,
As part of tomorrow's meeting, we have two motions, with one amendment on the agenda after the gTLD decision. I have enclosed those in this email for reference. Both of these were originally proposed a week before the meeting or more.
thank a.
-------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
---
Proposed Motion on GA mailing list rules (submitted 25 Aug)
----
Whereas the GA list sent a request to the GNSO council for approval of its new list rules,
and whereas the GNSO council is responsible for managing open forums, in the form of mailing lists, and the GA list is one such open forum,
Resolved:
The GNSO chair will send a message to the GA List stating the following:
The GNSO council acknowledges the GA List's charter request and thanks the particpants for consulting with the GNSO council on this issue.
Given the council's by-law responsibilities for the moderation of the GA list, the council encourages the GA List's movement toward self moderation and supports the GA List in implementing the mailing list rules (found at http://www.geolang.com/draftGAListRules5.htm) indicated in Section 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with the following exception in section 2:
The Announce list is available for official pronouncements only. Emanating from the Secretariat of the NC and/or the Chair of the GA
The Announce list is and should remain solely for the sole use of the GNSO Secretariat for notifying the subscribers of GNSO and other ICANN informational items.
With regard to the organizational sections of the charter, specifically sections 6, 8, and 9, the GNSO council accepts that members participating the list are free to determine their own organizational structure, with the following exceptions in section 8 on elections:
An election is usually held near the end of the term of office for the chair of the General Assembly. The exact time is decided by the outgoing Chair and the Chair of the GNSO.
The GNSO council, and its chair, cannot accept any responsibility for the internal governance of an organizational movement on the GA List at this time and restricts the council's actions to issues concerning the moderation of the GA List as determined by the by-laws.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed motion for end process for Whois TF and WG to be voted on September 6 2007 (proposed Aug 30) ---------------------------------------------------------
Whereas the Whois Task force report has not yet been voted on as required by the by-laws,
Whereas the Whois WG was created to collect further information as defined in its terms of reference,
Whereas the Whois WG has now completed its work,
Whereas almost 6 months have gone by since the release of the Whois Task force report,
Resolved:
A - The GNSO council acknowledges the report and thanks the members and the chair of the Working group for their efforts.
B - The GNSO Council should now complete this work on Whois and make its report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board.
C - In order to complete the work the following steps will be taken as scheduled:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically (Quote from by-laws)
1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy.
(end Quote)
Final Date for for updated statement: October 4, 2007 which is 35 days from the meeting when the Whois WG report was discussed
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments into the Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
---------------------------
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with "during the LA Public Meeting".
Hi, On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well. It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended. I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded. Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded. I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table. thanks ---------------------- Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007 Whereas; 1. The Whois WG has now completed its work, Therefore; Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council; The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also: a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group. b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy. c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007. d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf. d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows: 1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process. 2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following: (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue; (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members; (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views; (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and (v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy. **Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007 3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007 4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15 5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007 6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting 7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007 On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with "during the LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
I will second your motion Avri. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
Am I correct in concluding that the BC compromise motion is an attempt to consolidate the key elements of all the motions? If so, that is an important consideration as we discuss the motions today. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
It is an attempt to capture the key portions of Avri's and the BC motion. Mike Rodenbaugh Sr. Legal Director Yahoo! Inc. NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 6:52 AM To: Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007 Am I correct in concluding that the BC compromise motion is an attempt to consolidate the key elements of all the motions? If so, that is an important consideration as we discuss the motions today. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
And Ross's motion as well? Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mxr@yahoo-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:08 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
It is an attempt to capture the key portions of Avri's and the BC motion.
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 6:52 AM To: Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Am I correct in concluding that the BC compromise motion is an attempt to consolidate the key elements of all the motions? If so, that is an important consideration as we discuss the motions today.
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end
process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
I have to admit that I'm not sure what we will be voting on anymore. Could someone please send all motions that are going to be tabled on todays call to this list (whois only). Thanks, tom Gomes, Chuck schrieb:
And Ross's motion as well?
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mxr@yahoo-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:08 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
It is an attempt to capture the key portions of Avri's and the BC motion.
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 6:52 AM To: Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Am I correct in concluding that the BC compromise motion is an attempt to consolidate the key elements of all the motions? If so, that is an important consideration as we discuss the motions today.
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council
meeting September
6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly
amendment
as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment
remains on the
table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike
Rodenbaugh for
vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN
board at this
time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by
the Working
Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the
different
proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical
studies that
Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program
outlined by
ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working
Group reports,
complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community
and to the
ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include
the text
of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement
Review on
September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for
soliciting
the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems
appropriate, regarding
the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal
statement to
the task force chair (each, a "Constituency
Statement") within
thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear
statement
of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency
arrived at
its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would
likely be
necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement:
October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 -
November 6,
2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the
LA Public
Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional
factual study,
and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to
incorporate that
information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest
it as an
alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client
and/or work
product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient
then please
delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end
process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
Hi, Glen will be sending out the official text shortly. I would like to work something out for motions in the future. I think I may try to use one of those collaborative work environments like docs.google.com or some such that allows anyone who wants to see a document as it is being edited. I will look into it. I too have felt that as we work to improve and amend a motion on the call people lose track of some of the wording changes. I know I am having a hard enough making the changes in my version and then reading it out. Using one of these environments anyone who was on the net could see the changes as they were made. thanks a. On 6 sep 2007, at 17.31, Thomas Keller wrote:
I have to admit that I'm not sure what we will be voting on anymore. Could someone please send all motions that are going to be tabled on todays call to this list (whois only).
Thanks,
tom
Gomes, Chuck schrieb:
And Ross's motion as well?
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mxr@yahoo-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:08 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
It is an attempt to capture the key portions of Avri's and the BC motion.
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 6:52 AM To: Avri Doria; GNSO Council Subject: RE: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007
Am I correct in concluding that the BC compromise motion is an attempt to consolidate the key elements of all the motions? If so, that is an important consideration as we discuss the motions today.
Chuck Gomes
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 3:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council
meeting September
6 2007
Hi,
On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly
amendment
as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well.
It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment
remains on the
table and will be voted on before the motion as amended.
I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded.
Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded.
I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table.
thanks
----------------------
Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike
Rodenbaugh for
vote on Sept 06, 2007
Whereas;
1. The Whois WG has now completed its work,
Therefore;
Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council;
The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also:
a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group.
b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN
board at this
time concerning Whois or related policy.
c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by
the Working
Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the
different
proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical
studies that
Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007.
d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program
outlined by
ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf.
d) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working
Group reports,
complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community
and to the
ICANN Board, as follows:
1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include
the text
of motions to be voted on at the end of this process.
2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement
Review on
September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for
soliciting
the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems
appropriate, regarding
the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal
statement to
the task force chair (each, a "Constituency
Statement") within
thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following:
(i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear
statement
of the constituency's position on the issue;
(ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members;
(iii) A clear statement of how the constituency
arrived at
its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views;
(iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and
(v) An analysis of the period of time that would
likely be
necessary to implement the policy.
**Final Date for for updated constituency statement:
October 4, 2007
3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007
4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15
5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 -
November 6,
2007
6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the
LA Public
Meeting
7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007
On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will rescind that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates BC, IPC and GAC request for an additional
factual study,
and requests updates on ongoing ICANN studies, to
incorporate that
information into the process suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest
it as an
alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client
and/or work
product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient
then please
delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end
process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31, 2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with
"during the
LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
Avri, surely keeping track of motions falls under the general category of professional secretariat support ? There should be no need for special web tools when we have a number of competent Brussels-based professional staff. Perhaps Denise could advise. Philip
Hi, I was thinking of more during a teleconference when we are inserting changes, friendly motions and voted amendments. When we are face to face, we can see this projected. When we are in a teleconference each member has to try and keep her own copy of the motions, and even reading it is not a perfect solution. That is why I am looking for a tool that can be used during the meeting. Of course it is something i plan to use, but something which anyone else can ignore if they so desire, just as they can avoid paying atteniton to the screen if they wish. Our secretariat already does a lot to make sure we can keep track of everything, but I do not believe there is anything she could do to keep us coordinated on the same text during a meeting. thanks a. On 7 sep 2007, at 06.04, philip.sheppard@aim.be wrote:
Avri, surely keeping track of motions falls under the general category of professional secretariat support ? There should be no need for special web tools when we have a number of competent Brussels-based professional staff.
Perhaps Denise could advise. Philip
Thanks Avri, I also last night had added in one other request for an update as to the pending SSAC study, which I think you may have inadvertently omitted from below? It should go as section (e) and then the process outline as section (f): e) requests an update on the pending SSAC study on "Information Gathering Using Domain Name Registration Records" outlined in September, 2006. See http://www.icann.org/committees/security/information-gathering-28Sep2006 .pdf Now I have inserted it below and changed the numbering. Mike Rodenbaugh Sr. Legal Director Yahoo! Inc. NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as possible. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 12:14 AM To: GNSO Council Subject: Re: [council] Motions under AOB for council meeting September 6 2007 Hi, On consideration I will accept your proposal as a friendly amendment as stated below. I have also accepted Chuck's friendly amendment on your friendly amendment as well. It is also my assumption that Ross' proposed amendment remains on the table and will be voted on before the motion as amended. I must note that my original motion was never properly seconded. Does anyone second this motion? The proposed amendment, has however, been seconded. I am assuming that now both the original Mike Rodenbough (BCUC) motion and the counter motion by Ross Rader are now off the table. thanks ---------------------- Proposed motion to finish Whois work as amended by Mike Rodenbaugh for vote on Sept 06, 2007 Whereas; 1. The Whois WG has now completed its work, Therefore; Be it resolved, that the GNSO Council; The GNSO Council accepts the WG report and appreciates the efforts made by WG participants and ICANN staff in preparing this report. Further, the GNSO council also: a) graciously thanks all of the volunteers, consultants, staff and others who have participated in the Task Force and Working Group. b) makes no specific policy recommendation to the ICANN board at this time concerning Whois or related policy. c) requests ICANN Staff to proceed with a study of the factual characteristics of the Whois database, as suggested by the GAC and by the Working Group report. This study should include a review and analysis of the different proxy services available today, a summary of any other statistical studies that Staff can locate, and ideally should be completed by October 4, 2007. d) requests an update on the WHOIS Data Accuracy Program outlined by ICANN Staff on April 27th, including any statistical information that can be summarized thus far. See http://www.icann.org/whois/whois-data-accuracy- program-27apr07.pdf. e) requests an update on the pending SSAC study on "Information Gathering Using Domain Name Registration Records" outlined in September, 2006. See http://www.icann.org/committees/security/information-gathering-28Sep2006 .pdf f) shall review any additional factual information, in conjunction with the policy suggestions from the Task Force and Working Group reports, complete this work on Whois, and make a report to the ICANN community and to the ICANN Board, as follows: 1 - Staff will produce a Draft Final Report that references the TF report, the WG charter and the WG report by and which includes an overall description of the process by September 13. This overview should include the text of motions to be voted on at the end of this process. 2 - This report will be sent out for Constituency Statement Review on September 13. Constituencies will be asked to follow the by-laws on constituency statements. Specifically : 1. Constituency Statements. The Representatives will each be responsible for soliciting the position of their constituencies, at a minimum, and other comments as each Representative deems appropriate, regarding the issue under consideration. This position and other comments, as applicable, should be submitted in a formal statement to the task force chair (each, a "Constituency Statement") within thirty-five (35) calendar days after initiation of the PDP. Every Constituency Statement shall include at least the following: (i) If a Supermajority Vote was reached, a clear statement of the constituency's position on the issue; (ii) If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement of all positions espoused by constituency members; (iii) A clear statement of how the constituency arrived at its position(s). Specifically, the statement should detail specific constituency meetings, teleconferences, or other means of deliberating an issue, and a list of all members who participated or otherwise submitted their views; (iv) An analysis of how the issue would affect the constituency, including any financial impact on the constituency; and (v) An analysis of the period of time that would likely be necessary to implement the policy. **Final Date for for updated constituency statement: October 4, 2007 3 - Staff will Incorporate Constituency comments and any additional factual information into Final Report by October 11, 2007 4 - Staff is requested to produce staff implementation notes by October 15 5 - Community Public Comment on Final Report: October 15 - November 6, 2007 6 - A Public and Council Discussion will be held during the LA Public Meeting 7 - Final vote on first GNSO Council meeting after November 6, 2007 On 6 sep 2007, at 02.09, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
The BC also had a motion pending, seconded by the IPC. We will
rescind
that motion in favor of this compromise motion that incorporates
BC, IPC
and GAC request for an additional factual study, and requests
updates on
ongoing ICANN studies, to incorporate that information into the
process
suggested by Avri's motion.
Please see attached. I am not sure if Avri would consider this a
friendly amendment to her motion. But otherwise we suggest it as an
alternative.
Kind regards,
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sr. Legal Director
Yahoo! Inc.
NOTE: This message may be protected by attorney-client and/or work
product privileges, if you are not the intended recipient then please
delete this message and all attachments and notify me as soon as
possible. Thanks.
...
Proposed Amendment From Ross Rader to the Whois end process motion:
- that "November 6, 2007" in step 5 be replaced with "October 31,
2007"
- that "after November 6, 2007" in step 7 be replaced with "during
the LA Public Meeting".
<BC Compromise Resolution - 2.doc>
participants (6)
-
Avri Doria -
Avri Doria -
Gomes, Chuck -
Mike Rodenbaugh -
philip.sheppard＠aim.be -
Thomas Keller