Dear all, On behalf of Bruce Tonkin, please find attached the following documents: (1) a proposed process outline for the suggested GAC-GNSO facilitated dialogue; and (2) an initial draft problem statement on the topic of protections for the remaining Red Cross identifiers at issue. Document (1) was prepared on the basis of the coordinating call that took place on 20 December 2016 (as captured in the notes circulated earlier by Bruce, below); and Document (2) is a draft for your review and further discussion. An initial draft problem statement on the topic of protections for IGO acronyms will follow shortly. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mary.wong@icann.org Telephone: +1-603-5744889 On 1/11/17, 21:46, "discussion-igo-rc-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Bruce Tonkin" <discussion-igo-rc-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> wrote: Hello All, Here is an updated version of the notes I sent out on 29 Dec. I have added the suggestion from Mark Carvell regarding ongoing work to resolve the Red Cross issue, and also clarified as Jorge Cancio suggested that separate briefing papers be provided for Red Cross and IGO issues. Note the call on 20/21 Dec was not recorded or transcribed. The call was organized fairly informally over the Christmas period. However going forward any future such calls before Copenhagen will be recorded and transcribed. Regards, Bruce Tonkin Present: Facilitator - Bruce Tonkin ICANN Org - Göran Marby, Olof Nordling, Mary Wong, Tina Shelebian ICANN Board - Markus Kummer , Becky Burr (joined after call commenced) GNSO Council - James Bladel (chair), Heather Forrest (Vice Chair), Donna Austin (Vice chair) GAC - Thomas Schneider (chair), Mark Carvell (UK), Ashley Heineman (USA), Jorge Cancio (Switzerland) Notes: - during the ICANN meeting in Hyderabad, the Board requested that the CEO and ICANN organization provide support for a facilitated meeting between the GAC and GNSO to try to resolve the differences between the GNSO policy recommendations and GAC advice as it relates to the Protection of Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement (Red Cross) names and Protection of International Governmental Organizations (IGO) names . The Board doesn't intend to take a position to accept or reject the GNSO recommendations or GAC advice until this occurs. - there was support for a facilitated discussion on Protection of Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement (Red Cross) names and Protection of International Governmental Organizations (IGO) names at the ICANN 58 Meeting scheduled for Copenhagen on 11-16 March 2017. - as there are specific international treaties and national laws relating to the Red Cross - this should be subject to a separate discussion - the GNSO will continue its related policy work, including its PDP work on – IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms - proposed recommendations are likely to be available for public comment by Copenhagen - there was a shared commitment to resolve the Red Cross issue as soon as possible through active consultations in advance of the Copenhagen meeting. - the facilitated discussion will take into account existing laws, and the mission of ICANN as specified in the bylaws - the aim is to get briefing papers ready 3 weeks prior to the start of the ICANN meeting - ie by 18 Feb 2017 - Separate briefing papers will be prepared for the IGOs and Red Cross topics - any discussions on this topic will be open and transparent. A separate publicly- archived mailing list for planning will be established, and briefing papers will be shared on the mailing list in draft form prior to finalization. The facilitated discussion will be an open discussion and will be transcribed for the record. The Board would also be invited to observe the discussion. - it is up to the GAC and the GNSO Council to nominate who they would like to have as active speakers in the facilitated discussion - any outcomes of the facilitated discussion that seek to reconcile the differences between the GNSO policy recommendations and the GAC Advice would need to go through the normal GAC and GNSO operating procedures for approval, but both parties would enter the discussion in good faith to fully understand the issues and seek to identify how to reconcile the differences - briefing papers will include: - problem statement and purpose of the facilitated discussion, and how the outcomes may be treated by GAC, GNSO and Board - history of the topic over the past 3 years - GNSO PDP key dates, GAC advice dates, Board resolutions, working groups - relevant international treaties and national laws that speak to protection of Red Cross and IGO names - ICANN mission statement and scope as it relates to the topic - GNSO Policy recommendations - GAC advice on the topic - inconsistencies between GNSO Policy recommendations and GAC advice _______________________________________________ Discussion-igo-rc mailing list Discussion-igo-rc@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion-igo-rc