|19 February 2009
Proposed agenda and documents
List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C
Mike Rodenbaugh - Commercial & Business Users C
Zahid Jamil - Commercial & Business Users C.
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC - absent, apologies
Tony Holmes - ISCPC
Stéphane van Gelder - Registrars
Tim Ruiz - Registrars
Adrian Kinderis - Registrars - absent
Chuck Gomes - gTLD registries - absent, apologies
Edmon Chung - gTLD registries
Jordi Iparraguirre - gTLD registries
Kristina Rosette - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent, aplogies
Cyril Chua - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent
Mary Wong - NCUC - absent - apologies
William Drake - NCUC
Carlos Souza - NCUC - absent, apologies
Olga Cavalli- Nominating Committee appointee
Terry Davis - Nominating Committee appointee
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee
14 Council Members
( 18 Votes - quorum)
Denise Michel - Vice President, Policy Development
Kurt Pritz - Senior Vice President, Services
Dan Halloran - Deputy General Counsel
Robert Hoggarth - Senior Policy Director
Liz Gasster - Senior Policy Officer
Olof Nordling - Director, Services Relations and Branch Manager, Brussels office
Marika Konings - Policy Director
Margie Milam - Senior Policy Counselor
Julie Hedlund - Policy consultant
Glen de Saint Gery - GNSO Secretariat
GNSO Council Liaisons
Alan Greenberg - ALAC Liaison
Rita Rodin - ICANN Board member - absent - apologies
Bruce Tonkin - ICANN Board member - absent apologies
Item 1: Update any Statements of Interest
Tony Holmes and Olga Cavalli updated their statements of interest
Item 2: Review/amend the agenda
Item 3 add: GNSO Council draft minutes08 January 2009
Added RAA Motion under Item AOB.
Item 3: Approve GNSO Council minutes:
18 December 2008
08 January 2009
Kristina Rosette, seconded by Zahid Jamil, moved the adoption of the GNSO Council minutes of 18 December 2008
The motion passed unanimously.
One Abstention: Mike Rodenbaugh - the reason for the abstention is that Mike had not yet reviewed the minutes
Greg Ruth, seconded by Olga Cavalli, moved the adoption of the GNSO Council minutes of 8 January 2009.
The motion passed unanimously.
One Abstention: Mike Rodenbaugh - the reason for the abstention is that Mike had not yet reviewed the minutes
Decision 1. The Council approved the GNSO Council minutes of 18 December 2008 and 8 January 2009
Item 4: Registration Abuse Policy Working Group and Policy Development Process (PDP)
Kristina Rosette, seconded by Mike Rodenbaugh, with a friendly amendment by Avri Doria, proposed the following motion on a Charter for Registration Abuse Policies.
Whereas GNSO Council Resolution (20081218-3) dated December 18, 2008 called for the creation of a drafting team "to create a proposed charter for a working group to investigate the open issues documented in the issues report on Registrations[sic] Abuse Policy".
Whereas a drafting team has formed and its members have discussed and reviewed the open issues documented in the issues report.
Whereas it is the view of the drafting Team that the objective of the Working Group should be to gather facts, define terms, provide the appropriate focus and definition of the policy issue(s), if any, to be addressed, in order to enable the GNSO Council to make an informed decision as to whether to launch PDP on registration abuse.
Whereas the drafting team recommends that the GNSO Council charter a Working Group to
- (i) further define and research the issues outlined in the Registration Abuse Policies Issues Report; and
- (ii) take the steps outlined below.
The Working Group should complete its work before a decision is taken by the GNSO Council on whether to launch a PDP.
The GNSO Council RESOLVES:
To form a Working Group of interested stakeholders and Constituency representatives, to collaborate broadly with knowledgeable individuals and organizations, to further define and research the issues outlined in the Registration Abuse Policies Issues Report; and take the steps outlined in the Charter. The Working Group should address the issues outlined in the Charter and report back to the GNSO Council within 90 days following the end of the ICANN meeting in Mexico City.
Scope and definition of registration abuse - the Working Group should define domain name registration abuse, as distinct from abuse arising solely from use of a domain name while it is registered. The Working Group should also identify which aspects of the subject of registration abuse are within ICANN's mission to address and which are within the set of topics on which ICANN may establish policies that are binding on gTLD registry operators and ICANN-accredited registrars. This task should include an illustrative categorization of known abuses.
Additional research and identifying concrete policy issues - The issues report outlines a number of areas where additional research would be needed in order to understand what problems may exist in relation to registration abuse and their scope, and to fully appreciate the current practices of contracted parties, including research to:
- 'Understand if registration abuses are occurring that might be curtailed or better addressed if consistent registration abuse policies were established'
- 'Determine if and how [registration] abuse is dealt with in those registries [and registrars] that do not have any specific [policies] in place'
- 'Identify how these registration abuse provisions are [...] implemented in practice or deemed effective in addressing registration abuse'.
In addition, additional research should be conducted to include the practices of relevant entities other than the contracted parties, such as abusers, registrants, law enforcement, service providers, and so on.
The Working Group should determine how this research can be conducted in a timely and efficient manner -- by the Working Group itself via a Request for Information (RFI), by obtaining expert advice, and/or by exploring other options.
Based on the additional research and information, the Working Group should identify and recommend specific policy issues and processes for further consideration by the GNSO Council.
SSAC Participation and Collaboration
The Working Group should
(i) consider inviting a representative from the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) to participate in the Working Group;
(ii) consider in further detail the SSAC's invitation to the GNSO Council to participate in a collaborative effort on abuse contacts; and
(iii) make a recommendation to the Council about this invitation.
Workshop at ICANN meeting in Mexico City on Registration Abuse Policies - In order to get broad input on and understanding of the specific nature of concerns from community stakeholders, the drafting team proposes to organize a workshop on registration abuse policies in conjunction with the ICANN meeting in Mexico City. The Working Group should review and take into account the discussions and recommendations, if any, from this workshop in its deliberations.
The working group established by this motion will work according to the process defined in working_group_process.
The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.
Present at the time of the vote:
Philip Sheppard, Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil (CBUC): Greg Ruth, Tony Holmes (ISCPC): Stéphane van Gelder, Tim Ruiz (Registrar c.): Edmon Chung, Jordi Iparraguirre (gTLD registries c.): Kristina Rosette (Intellectual Property Interests c.): William Drake (NCUC): Olga Cavalli, Terry Davis, Avri Doria (Nominating Committee appointee).
Antonio Harris I(SCPC): Adrian Kinderis (Registrar c.) Chuck Gomes (gTLD registries c.): Ute Decker, Cyril Chua (Intellectual Property Interests c.): Mary Wong, Carlos Souza (NCUC).
Action Item:The working group needs a liaison between the Council and the Working Group.
Kristina Rosette volunteered for the role of liaison.
Item 5: GNSO Council Restructuring Implementation Plan
Rob Hoggarth noted that the GNSO Council Restructuring Implementation Plan before Council that was still in draft form had 4 main components:
I. Fundamental Community Principles To Be Followed:
1. Leadership elections will be de novo based on the enfranchised new interim body.
2. Full outreach and bottom-up discussion at each stage of the transition
II. Council Implementation Priorities (not necessarily sequential in all cases
III. Inventory of Key Process and Implementation Decisions to Effectuate Transition to Restructured GNSO Council (specific decision categories and target dates still subject to Council discussion):
IV. Significant Board/ Bylaw Timelines/Deadlines (does not include implementation of any other “improvements” matters being addressed by 16
October 2008 High-Level Implementation Plan Structure):
Rob Hoggart further noted that 2 notices of Intent to form new constituencies had been received from the City TLD Constituency and the Cybersafety Constituency.
Kristina Rosette commented that the Intellectual Property constituency was finding it difficult to find the volunteer resources to cover both the GNSO restructuring efforts and the policy issues that Council is undertaking.
Mike Rodenbaugh asked whether the Board was kept up to date on the Council's restructuring progress and commented that the Council would probably not have everything done by June.
Denise Michel responded that the ICANN Board received a monthly update relating to the GNSO improvements and restructuring.
Avri Doria requested that the updates to the Board, which would appear to present a complete picture of all the work in progress, be shared with the Council.
Staff committed to fulfill the request.
Avri Doria commented that there would be time during the Open Council meeting in Mexico City for the new constituencies that made applications to give a short presentation.
Council agreed to form a Restructuring drafting team, comprised of mostly Council members and at least one person from each constituency.
The task of the drafting team will be to:
- initially edit the list of Restructuring work items sent to the Board http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf
- discuss the items one by one, then draft the appropriate motions for a Council vote.
- Call for volunteers
- Schedule a face to face meeting in Mexico City on Saturday 28 February or Sunday 1 March 2009
Item 6: Status Updates
6.1 Board Update
Rob Hoggarth, in the absence of Denise Michel reported on the ICANN Board meeting on 3 February 2009.
6.2 ccNSO Liaison update
Olga Cavalli commented that the ccNSO council expressed concern over the GNSO Council resolution passed on 8 January 2009.
"1) the GNSO Council strongly believes that neither the New gTLD or ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN TLDs in the root before the other unless both the GNSO and ccNSO so agree, and ..."
Avri Doria responded the topic would be discussed at the joint ccNSO/GNSO lunch meeting in Mexico City.
Olga Cavalli reported that the ccNSO observer to the GNSO Council would probably be decided in Mexico City.
6.3 Geographical Region WG update
Olga Cavalli reported that the Geographical Region Working Group had developed a draft charter and this was up for public comment. The group was planning to hold a face to face meeting in Mexico City.
6.4 Planning for Mexico City meeting
Avri Doria walked the Council through the GNSO Mexico City schedule for February 28 to 5 March 2009.
6.5.1 gTLD Implementation
Kurt Pritz informed the Council that the New gTLD Guidebook, V2 will be posted for public comment. It is broken down into six individual modules, providing seven discussion areas, so comments can either be made on the overall document or per module. Each module’s discussion area, will contain a list of papers that serve as explanatory memoranda to that particular module. In addition, a red-lined and annotated version of the document will be provided to facilitate the understanding of the changes that were made in progressing from Draft Applicant Guidebook, V1 to V2.
Further community consultation is being sought.
6.5.2 ccTLD FT Implementation update
A public comment period opened on 18 February 2009 on a number of proposed implementation features in the “Fast Track” process, as well as an updated version of the Fast Track Implementation Plan .
6.5.3 RAA Update note from Kurt
Mike Rodenbaugh requested Staff to comment on the recent email exchange with Kurt Pritz concerning the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
Dan Halloran responded that it would be best to do so in writing after consultation with other Staff members.
Marika Konings reported that the summary of the public comments was complete and the group would meet face to face in Mexico City.
6.6.2.IRTP Part A PDP
Marika Konings reported that the Final report would be ready for the Mexico City meeting and the group would meet face to face there. Three public comments had been received in all.
Avri Doria reported that a discussion and vote is planned for the Mexico City Council meeting on 4 March 2009.
Alan Greenberg noted that the ALAC priority list for WHOIS studies would be submitted to the Council within a day or two.
6.7.2 Travel Policy
Olga Cavalli reported that the Travel drafting team planned to meet with Kevin Wilson and Stacy Hofberg during the Mexico City meetings.
6.7.3 Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery PDP
Alan Greenberg reported that there would be a motion for the Mexico City meeting and urged members to join the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery PDP drafting group.
6.8.1 PPSC and 6.8.2 OSC Update
Meetings are planned for both groups in Mexico City.
6.8.3 Constituency Update
Robert Hoggarth reported that all the constituency reconfirmation filings had been received prior to the February 3 2009 ICANN Board meeting and have been placed on public comment which closes on 25 February 2009.
The filings were received in different formats but this was not likely to be an issue.
6.8.4. Stakeholder Group Update
Robert Hoggarth reported that the community had been advised that all new stakeholder group petitions should be provided to the ICANN Board by 1 March 2009.
6.7.5. Individual non-commercial Registrants in the GNSO
Alan Greenberg reported that the group found the 2008 December Board resolution unclear.
The working group decided that the issue was user participation, both individual and general versus registrant participation and proceeded on that basis. The group strongly reiterated and supported the term user versus registrant.
The recommendations support the concept of users, both individually and user entities, which is the current word in the bylaws and the constituency and stakeholder groups, and recommends that the Board approach should not prohibit users from being involved at these various levels. However the recommendations do not specify whether it is at the stakeholder or the constituency group level. That should be a matter for the internal organisation. Lastly, funded outreach to explain the process, was strongly recommended.
Alan added that despite the diversity in the group, it had produced a statement supported by nearly everyone.
Avri Doria proposed drafting a motion to endorse the work of the working group for the next Council meeting in Mexico City.
Item 7. Action list Review
Avri Doria drew Council's attention to the Action Item list. The list is updated before every Council meeting and is a means of tracking the Council work.
Liz Gasster commented that the Reserved Names issue had been on the list for a long time and committed to follow up with Staff before the next meeting.
Item 8. AOB
The Registrar Accreditation Agreement Motion that Mike Rodenbaugh proposed was deferred to the Council meeting on Wednesday, 4 March 2009.
Avri Doria adjourned the GNSO Council meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.
Next GNSO Council teleconference will on 4 March 2009 in Mexico City at 08:00 local time (14:00 UTC).
The meeting ended at 21: 10 UTC.