March 2020 - GNSO-RPM-WG - lists.icann.org

Post-ICANN67 Policy Report Now Available
by Julie Bisland March 23, 2020

March 23, 2020

Dear all, The Post-ICANN67 Policy Report is now available. Please click here to access it: https://go.icann.org/post67 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__go.icann.org_post67&d=…> . Thank you. Kind regards, Julie -- Julie Bisland GNSO SO/AC Support coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype ID: 79613b691cb8a6c1 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…>

1 0

Public Comment Open - RPM PDP Phase 1 Initial Report
by Ariel Liang March 18, 2020

March 18, 2020

Dear RPM PDP Working Group, This is to let you know that the Phase 1 Initial Report has been published for public comment on icann.org: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rpm-initial-report-2020-03-18-en The public comment period will officially start at 23:59 UTC today (18 March 2020), and it is scheduled to close in 40 days (on 27 April 2020 at 23:59 UTC). Please note that the PDF and Word versions of the Google Forms are available on the public comment page, under “Relevant Resources”. Translations of the Executive Summary section (in the other 5 UN languages) will be posted on that page when they become available. Thanks very much for everyone’s hard work for achieving this milestone, and thanks to the three Co-Chairs (Phil, Kathy, and Brian) for leading this effort. We hope everyone stays safe and healthy during this difficult time, taking care yourself and your loved ones. Best Regards, Mary, Julie, Ariel

3 2

ICANN Community Excellence Award - Nomination Closes 27 March 2020
by Andrea Glandon March 17, 2020

March 17, 2020

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2020-03-16-en [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_ann…> ICANN Community Excellence Award: Nomination Closes 27 March 2020 LOS ANGELES – 16 March 2020 – The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) reminds community members that the nomination period for ICANN's Community Excellence Award is open until 27 March 2020 23:59 Universal Coordinated Time (UTC). The ICANN Community Excellence Award recognizes community members who have significantly invested in consensus-based solutions and have contributed substantively to the ICANN multistakeholder model. The ideal recipient(s) will have: · Participated in the ICANN community for a minimum of five years. · Served in multiple ICANN working groups or committees. · Collaborated significantly with more than one Supporting Organization (SO) and/or Advisory Committee (AC). Candidates will be evaluated by a panel of community members appointed by the SO/AC chairs using a merit-based point system evaluated against three criteria: 1. Demonstrates an ability to work across community lines with both familiar and unfamiliar ICANN stakeholders with the aim of building consensus. 2. Facilitates dialogue and open discussion in a fair and collegial manner through the spirit of collaboration, showing empathy and demonstrating a sincere desire to engage with people from other backgrounds, cultures, and interests. 3. Demonstrates additional support for ICANN multistakeholder model and its overall effectiveness through volunteer service via working groups or committees. Please submit nominations via this nomination form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_forms_…> and include detailed information outlining why the nominee meets the award criteria. Any additional information in support of nominations and/or questions about the award process may be submitted to exellenceaward2020(a)icann.org<mailto:excellenceaward2020@icann.org>. Award recipient(s) will be announced in June 2020 at ICANN68 in Kuala Lumpur. For more information on the award program, please refer to the ICANN Community Wiki.<https://community.icann.org/x/YyOAAw>

1 0

REMINDER - Cancelled: Session 4 of the RPMs PDP WG Sessions at ICANN67
by Julie Hedlund March 12, 2020

March 12, 2020

Dear RPMs PDP WG members, This is a reminder that the final session scheduled for later today is cancelled and has been removed from the online schedule. Kind regards, Julie From: GNSO-RPM-WG <gnso-rpm-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 at 1:10 PM To: "gnso-rpm-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-rpm-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-RPM-WG] Cancelled: Session 4 of the RPMs PDP WG Sessions at ICANN67 Dear RPMs PDP WG members, Per the agreement of the WG members and Co-Chairs on during today’s WG session #3, as there are no further agenda items the final session #4, as scheduled below, is cancelled. It will be removed from the online schedule. CANCELLED: Thursday, 12 March: 14:45-15:45 (Cancún)/19:45-20:45 UTC/15:45-16:45 EDT – Session 4 of 4 Please let us know if you have any questions. Kind regards, Mary, Ariel, and Julie

1 0

Finalized Phase 1 Initial Report & Updated Google Forms
by Ariel Liang March 12, 2020

March 12, 2020

Dear RPM Working Group, Please find attached the finalized Phase 1 Initial Report in PDF format. * Staff has completed the remaining actions item by incorporating WG members’ suggestion to the contextual language of URS Question #1. Please see page 32. Specifically, the reference to “Default Determinations” is in the last sentence of the second paragraph on page 32. * Since the WG has concluded the review of the entire report in its draft format, no substantive edits can be made at this stage. * However, if you see any typos, grammatical errors, and formatting issues that need to be corrected, please comment on list no later than 23:59 UTC on Friday, 13 March 2020. Comments received after that date/time will not be considered. In addition, please also find the link to the Google Forms for public comment: https://forms.gle/Pq3bpxP3y4BFC11p7 * The instructions in Section 1 of the form have been updated, incorporating WG’s suggestions (we found an alternative way to “bold” and show emphasis instead of using all capitals – we hope this method would suffice). * Please feel free to test it out and click the links within the form. * If you detect any typos, errors, unclear instructions, and usability issues, please also comment on list no later than 23:59 UTC on Friday, 13 March 2020. Shortly after 23:59 UTC on Friday, 13 March, staff plan to send the final document and Google Forms to the ICANN team that manages public comment forum for final processing. Again, thanks everyone for your time and hard work throughout the process. Best Regards, Mary, Julie, Ariel

2 1

Notes and Action Items: RPM PDP WG Meeting 11 March 2019
by Julie Hedlund March 11, 2020

March 11, 2020

Dear All, Please see below the action items captured by staff from the RPM PDP Working Group call held on 11 March 2019 at 15:45 UTC at the virtual ICANN67 meeting. Staff will post these to the wiki space. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, Zoom chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-11+ICANN67+-+Revie…. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director == NOTES & ACTION ITEMS Actions: 1. EPDP Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations: Review the revised text in Recommendation 1 of URS Deliberations [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (pages 1, 2 and new question on page 10) Question 1: ACTION ITEMS: -- Add specific mention of the EPDP Team for input. -- Add “(including the GDPR and other applicable privacy laws)”. -- Cross reference to mention in the report where it is noted that most URS are default cases. -- Change to “specifically, Recommendations #21, #23, and #27” and add a footnote with the recommendation text. -- Change “was referred” to “were referred”. 2. Public Comment Tool: ACTION ITEMS: -- Add to the introduction: "Please note: that there is an option at the end of this form for those who wish to add text or a point not covered by the questions" Also note that there is a character limit. -- Add at the end, “are there any other recommendations that you believe the WG should consider making?” -- Use all capitals to show emphasis – since boldface is not an option. But use sparingly. Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided. 2. EPDP Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations: Review the revised text in Recommendation 1 of URS Deliberations [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (pages 1, 2 and new question on page 10) Question 1: ACTION ITEMS: -- Add specific mention of the EPDP Team for input. -- Add “(including the GDPR and other applicable privacy laws)”. -- Cross reference to mention in the report where it is noted that most URS are default cases. -- Change to “specifically, Recommendations #21, #23, and #27” and add a footnote with the recommendation text. -- Change “was referred” to “were referred”. 3. Review of Initial Report Remaining Boilerplate Sections – Action Items from Monday’s meeting) – See the Google docs at: https://community.icann.org/x/1SOJBw Next Steps: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rUr_YS7PbxFDapazk2wtGxPulPsxgL76P45uCsS… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>: Staff will review the Charter to make sure any overarching issues are reflected in the Next Steps document and in the Charter Questions annex. -- Question: Whether the WG would like to call out the additional questions in the Initial Report for comment? Answer: WG confirms that they should be included for public comment. -- No changes from the WG. 4. Public Comment Tool: Address any questions/clarify possible areas of confusion. See: https://forms.gle/FjAarKNu2HGzdKo8A [forms.gle] [forms.gle]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__forms.gle_FjAarKNu2HGz…> -- Standard form for public comments. -- Ensures that the categorization of the comments is more accurate. Staff don’t have to make assumptions concerning support/non-support. -- Enables commenters to use a free-form box to provide general comments. -- Commenters can access both a Word and PDF version as a working document, although commenters will need to submit comments using the tool. ACTION ITEMS: -- Add to the introduction: "Please note: that there is an option at the end of this form for those who wish to add text or a point not covered by the questions" Also note that there is a character limit. -- Add at the end, “are there any other recommendations that you believe the WG should consider making?” -- Use all capitals to show emphasis – since boldface is not an option. But use sparingly.

1 0

Cancelled: Session 4 of the RPMs PDP WG Sessions at ICANN67
by Julie Hedlund March 11, 2020

March 11, 2020

Dear RPMs PDP WG members, Per the agreement of the WG members and Co-Chairs on during today’s WG session #3, as there are no further agenda items the final session #4, as scheduled below, is cancelled. It will be removed from the online schedule. CANCELLED: Thursday, 12 March: 14:45-15:45 (Cancún)/19:45-20:45 UTC/15:45-16:45 EDT – Session 4 of 4 Please let us know if you have any questions. Kind regards, Mary, Ariel, and Julie

1 0

REMINDER: Schedule and Proposed Agendas for RPMs PDP WG Sessions at ICANN67
by Julie Hedlund March 11, 2020

March 11, 2020

Dear RPMs PDP WG members, Per the ICANN67 Virtual Community Forum Schedule the sessions for the RPMs PDP WG are as follows and are on the schedule at: https://67.schedule.icann.org/meetings [67.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__67.schedule.icann.org_…>. Please note the proposed agendas for sessions #2 (10 March), #3 (11 March), and #4 (12 March, if needed) below, which also are posted on the wiki pages at the links below. (Session #1 was completed today.) The agendas for 10 and 11 March reflect WG review of suggested potential/preliminary recommendations on EPDP and CCT-RT issues. See the following ACTION ITEM from the WG meeting on 09 March in preparation for the 10 March meeting as well as the link to the explanatory staff email: ACTION ITEM: WG members are requested to review the new text in the Background [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (pages 14-15) and the URS Deliberations [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (page 1) sections pertaining to the EPDP (redlined text in the links). Explanatory Staff Email: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2020-March/004253.html Kindly note that staff have uploaded the google docs for the Initial report draft sections on this wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/1SOJBw. Please let us know if you have any questions. Kind regards, Mary, Ariel, and Julie ICANN67 Schedule – RPM PDP WG Sessions See the ICANN67 GNSO Remote Participation Details Virtual Meetings<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/ICANN67+GNSO+Remote…> The ICANN67 Virtual community Forum [67.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__67.schedule.icann.org_…> scheduled session times are all reflected as Eastern Standard Time (MX) for Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico [UTC-5]. Important Reminder: On 8 March, Eastern Standard Time (EST) changes in the U.S. and Canada to Eastern Daylight saving Time (EDT), however, there is NO TIME CHANGE in Cancún, Mexico or to the posted Virtual Community Forum schedule on this date. For the EASTERN US this means that the meeting times will be ONE HOUR LATER than the times listed in the local Cancún time. Tuesday, 10 March: 13:30-15:00 (Cancún)/18:30-19:00 UTC/14:30-16:00 EDT – Session 2 of 4 Proposed Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-10+ICANN67+Cancun+… 1. Review Agenda and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of EPDP Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations: Review the new text in the Background [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (pages 14-15) and the URS Deliberations [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (page 1) sections 3. AOB Wednesday, 11 March: 10:45-12:15 (Cancún)/15:45-17:15 UTC/11:45-13:15 EDT – Session 3 of 4 Proposed Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-11+ICANN67+Cancun+… 1. Review Agenda and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of CCT-RT Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations 3. Review of Initial Report Remaining Boilerplate Sections (carried over from Monday’s meeting) – See the Google docs at: https://community.icann.org/x/1SOJBw 4. AOB Thursday, 12 March: 14:45-15:45 (Cancún)/19:45-20:45 UTC/15:45-16:45 EDT – Session 4 of 4 Proposed Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-12+ICANN67+Cancun+… No agenda; meeting will be cancelled if not needed.

1 3

Notes and Action Items: RPM PDP WG Meeting 10 March 2019
by Julie Hedlund March 10, 2020

March 10, 2020

Dear All, Please see below the action items captured by staff from the RPM PDP Working Group call held on 10 March 2019 at 18:30 UTC at the virtual ICANN67 meeting. Staff will post these to the wiki space. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, Zoom chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-10+ICANN67+-+Revie…. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director == NOTES & ACTION ITEMS Actions: Review of EPDP Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations ACTION ITEMS: 1. Accept the minor/non-substantive edits to the first paragraph of the recommendation. 2. Delete the substantive edits to the second paragraph of the recommendation, but maintain the minor/non-substantive edits. 3. Delete the third paragraph of the recommendation and make it a question for public comment. 4. In the context section quote from Appendix D of the Temp Spec. Notes: 1. Review of EPDP Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations URS Recommendation #1: “Furthermore, the Working Group recommends that, to the extent this is operationally feasible, legally compliant and consistent with the final Phase 1 recommendations from the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data, the URS Procedure para 3.3 be amended to allow the Complainant to update the Complaint within 2-3 calendar days after the URS Provider provides updated discloses the registration data related to the disputed domain name(s).” -- Question about “operationally feasible, legally compliant” – need to be clearer. -- Reflects some of the concerns that people have had in the EPDP context. Given that we haven’t had the benefit of interactions with the providers who are getting the data and giving it to the complainant – we don’t know if our recommendation is feasible. So we put the caveats in. The EPDP also is wrestling with this as part of its Phase 2 recommendations. So we should reflect the need for any new requirement to be legally compliant. -- Who decides “legally compliant” – this is something the EDPD is talking about. The plan is that this is something that needs to be further discussed as part of implementation. -- The language around “legally compliant” is not as crisp. Suggest: “… to the extent that this is operationally feasible, compliant with applicable law, and consistent with the final Phase 1 recommendations …” -- FORUM has a process of automatically generating the complaint with the WHOIS information will populate automatically. We know that is often redacted. We contact the registry and sometimes the registrar to obtain the full contact information. When it comes to the amendment to the complaint that currently isn’t allowed under the rules. As far as the 2-3 calendar day window – for UDRP we require a 5-day window. That is a short window but you have to balance that with how fast you want the URS to be. We think that is feasible. -- Paragraphs 1 and 2 don’t change the WG’s recommendations. They were put in as we were discussing the EPDP and CCT-RT recommendations with the Co-Chairs. We thought we should make it clear that these two paragraphs do take into account the EPDP recommendations. -- Paragraph 3 is new. Staff is suggesting that new text to address whether there are GDPR implications. -- Strongly object to the addition of paragraph 3 and don’t think we need to alter paragraphs 1 and 2. -- Think about striking paragraph 3 and new language in paragraph 2. Add a paragraph that we recognize that this recommendation is going to affect the URS rules and supplemental rules but also rule 15 of the URS and once the registrant’s data is known that it could request that it continue to be shielded. -- Seems clear that the WG does not support paragraph 3 as a recommendation, but could be a question for public comment. Paragraph 2 – take the highlighted language out and note in the context that there was a range of views to flag it for public comment. -- Majority of WG members on the call supported maintaining the original language of paragraph 2, which was agreed to by the WG. -- EPDP tried to avoid using the terminology of “thin” registry. Staff suggestion is that we quote from appendix D of the Temp Spec, to make it clearer. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Accept the minor/non-substantive edits to the first paragraph of the recommendation. 2. Delete the substantive edits to the second paragraph of the recommendation, but maintain the minor/non-substantive edits. 3. Delete the third paragraph of the recommendation and make it a question for public comment. 4. In the context section quote from Appendix D of the Temp Spec. 2. Review of CCT-RT Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations -- New text on page 14 – staff wishes to confirm that the WG agrees with the summary of how the WG addressed the CCT-RT’s recommendations #9, #27, and #28. -- There are recommendations that related to the CCT-RT’s recommendations, but these are not addressed in a specific way. -- The WG members had no changes to the text.

1 0

ACTION ITEM: Preparation for CCT-RT Discussion on 11 March
by Julie Hedlund March 10, 2020

March 10, 2020

Dear RPMs PDP WG members, In preparation for the discussion of agenda item #2 below -- CCT-RT Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations -- on Wednesday, 11 March please review the new suggested text in redline on pages 14-15 in the Background section of the Initial Report at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13hDBmPZnazCz2Tv4yFOyBJsMEHOL5K1LQh7krGJ…. Kind regards, Mary, Ariel, and Julie Wednesday, 11 March: 10:45-12:15 (Cancún)/15:45-17:15 UTC/11:45-13:15 EDT – Session 3 of 4 Proposed Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/RARPMRIAGPWG/2020-03-11+ICANN67+Cancun+… 1. Review Agenda and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of CCT-RT Suggested Potential/Preliminary Recommendations 3. Review of Initial Report Remaining Boilerplate Sections (carried over from Monday’s meeting) – See the Google docs at: https://community.icann.org/x/1SOJBw 4. AOB

1 0