FYI The motion to support a F2F PDP meeting was not voted. There was an opposition from the BC. Discussions centered around lack of budget prevision and not enough funds to support all the requirements that could possibly be made after such a precedent. Jaime Wagner j@bwagner.com.br +55(51)8126-0916 skype: jaime_wagner From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: quinta-feira, 17 de dezembro de 2009 20:01 To: Council GNSO Subject: [council] GNSO Council Resolutions 17 December 2009 Dear All, Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following resolutions were passed unanimously during the Council meeting on Thursday, 17 December 2009. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you Kind regards, Glen 1. Motion To Approve Tool Kit of Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups (amended 4 Dec 09) Motion by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben and Olga Cavalli Whereas the Board Governance Committee Report on GNSO Improvements (BGC Report) tasked ICANN staff with developing, within six months, in consultation with the GNSO Council, a tool kit of basic services that would be made available to all constituencies. (See Report of the Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group on GNSO Improvements, 3 February 2008 located at <http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-0 3feb08.pdf>, p. 46.); Whereas the ICANN Board approved the BGC GNSO Improvement Recommendations on 26 June 2008 (<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182>); Whereas in January 2009 the GNSO Council formed the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) to develop recommendations to implement operational changes contained in the BGC Report; Whereas the OSC established three Work Teams, including the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team, to take on the work of each of the three operational areas addressed in the BGC Report recommendations; Whereas the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Operations Work Team developed and approved Tool Kit Services Recommendations for GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups on 25 October 2009 and sent them to the OSC for review; Whereas the OSC accepted the Work Team's recommendations; Whereas on 5 Nov 09 the document was distributed to the Council list and Councilors were asked to forward the recommendations to their respective groups for review and comment ASAP with the tentative goal of Council action in our December meeting; Whereas the implementation of the toolkit has process and budgetary implications; RESOLVED, the Council approves the recommendations (<http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/tool-kit-services-recommendations-for-gnso-05 nov09-en.pdf>) and directs Staff to: 1) share the recommendations with the Board; 2) post the document on the GNSO web page at <http://gnso.icann.org/>; 3) estimate the cost of the services; 4) estimate what funds might be available; 5) prioritize the list of services in cooperation with the Council; 6) develop specifications for providing the services, including requirements for their use and procedures for requesting them; and 7) notify applicable GNSO organizations of the services, specifications and procedures for requesting them. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. 2 Motion to Approve the Alternative Proposal recommended by the Special Trademark Issues Review Team (Amended 16 Dec 09) and amended by Kristina Rosette Motion made by: Stéphane van Gelder Seconded by: Debra Hughes Whereas, on 12 October 2009, the ICANN Board sent a letter (http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/beckstrom-to-gnso-council-12oct09-en.p df ) to the GNSO Council requesting its review of the policy implications of certain trademark protection mechanisms proposed for the New gTLD Program; Whereas, in response to the Board's letter, on 28 October 2009 the GNSO Council created the Special Trademarks Issues (STI) review team to analyze the staff implementation models of the Trademark Clearinghouse and Uniform Rapid Suspension System that were proposed for inclusion in the Draft Application Guidebook; Whereas, on 11 December 2009, the STI Review Team delivered its Report http://gnso.icann.org/issues/sti/sti-wt-recommendations-11dec09-en.pdf to the GNSO Council describing an alternative proposal to address trademark concerns in the New gTLD Program that was supported by a consensus of its members; Whereas, the GNSO has reviewed the STI Report, and the minority reports included therein, and desires to approve the alternative proposal recommended by the STI review team; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the GNSO appreciates the hard work and tremendous effort shown by each member of the STI review team in developing the STI alternative proposal on an expedited basis; Resolved, that the GNSO Council hereby approves the overall package of recommendations contained in the STI Report, and resolves that the STI proposal to create a Trademark Clearinghouse and a Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure as described in the STI Report are more effective and implementable solutions than the corresponding staff implementation models that were described in memoranda accompanying the Draft Applicant Guidebook Version 3; RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council directs Staff to forward the recommendations to the Board in response to its 12 October 2009 letter (http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/beckstrom-to-gnso-council-12oct09-en.p df) and acknowledges that the STI report will be posted as soon as possible for a public comment period that will end on 26 January 2010 to allow the ICANN community to comment on the STI recommendations prior to finalization of the model to be included in the Draft Applicant Guidebook. The motion passed unanimously by a roll call vote of all Council members present. Council members absent: Contracted Party House - Registrar Stakeholder Group: Adrian Kinderis Non Contracted Party House - NCSG - Rosemary Sinclair, Mary Wong 3. Motion to delay decision regarding initiation of a Vertical Integration PDP Made by: Chuck Gomes Seconded by Bill Drake and Jaime Wagner WHEREAS, the GNSO Council requested that Staff prepare an Issues Report on Vertical Integration at its 24 September 2009 meeting; WHEREAS, the Issues Report on Vertical Integration http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/report-04dec09-en.pdf has been delivered to the GNSO Council on 11 December 2009 <https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?action=display;is_incipient=1;p age_name=11%20December%202009> ; WHEREAS, in light of the approaching year-end holidays and the numerous important issues pending before the GNSO Council, the Council desires to have ample time to evaluate the recommendations contained in the Issues Report; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT: RESOLVED, that the Council acknowledges receipt of the Issues Report, thanks Staff for its efforts to produce the report, and agrees to delay consideration of the decision on whether to launch a PDP on the topic of vertical integration until January 2010. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org