GNSO Council Lisbon Meeting Minutes

Last Updated: 31 August 2009
Date: 
28 March 2007

28 March 2007

Proposed agenda and related documents

List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C.
Mike Rodenbaugh - Commercial & Business Users C.
Alistair Dixon - Commercial & Business Users C - remote participation
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Tony Holmes - ISCPC - absent - apologies
Thomas Keller- Registrars
Ross Rader - Registrars
Bruce Tonkin - Registrars
Chuck Gomes - gTLD registries
Edmon Chung - gTLD registries
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Kristina Rosette - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent
Robin Gross - NCUC.- absent - apologies
Norbert Klein - NCUC.
Mawaki Chango - NCUC - absent - apologies
Sophia Bekele - Nominating Committee appointee
Jon Bing - Nominating Committee appointee
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee

17 Council Members
(23 Votes - quorum)

ICANN Staff
Dan Halloran - Deputy General Counsel
Denise Michel - Vice President, Policy Development
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination
Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor
Maria Farrell - GNSO Policy Officer
Karen Lentz - gTLD Registry Liaison
Glen de Saint G�ry - GNSO Secretariat


GNSO Council Liaisons
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent - apologies
Alan Greenberg - ALAC Liaison

Quorum present at 10:00 UTC.

Transcript

Bruce Tonkin chaired this meeting

Approval of the agenda

Item 1: Update any Statements of Interest
No updates

Item 2: Approval of the GNSO Council minutes of 15 March 2007
Chuck Gomes
moved the adoption of the GNSO Council minutes of 15 March 2007

Motion approved.

Tom Keller abstained

Approval of the GNSO Council minutes of 15 March 2007

Decision 1: The GNSO Council minutes of 15 March 2007 were adopted.

Item 3: WHOIS PDP

- summarise outcome of meeting with the GAC
- next steps - consider forming an implementation working group to
resolve implementation details of concern to some constituencies around
OPoC

Bruce Tonkin summarised the WHOIS situation.
Registrars were currently contractually required to:
- provide adequate contact information to facilitate timely resolution of any problems that arise in connection with the registered name
- take reasonable precautions to protect personal data from loss, misuse, unauthorized access or disclosure, alteration or destruction.
Issues arose with the implementation, specified in the Registrars contract, of the above requirements. One implementation issue was that the data be freely available via the port-43, an IETF standard protocol and a second one was that data be available on the worldwide Web based query access via a Web site. The present implementation makes it difficult to protect personal data.

The WHOIS task force had attempted to improve the effectiveness of WHOIS services while taking into account the need to ensure privacy protection for the personal data of natural persons.
Contention arose around the purpose of WHOIS, and if there were a change in access, how would those who needed to contact people be able to do so acceptably.
The WHOIS task force has basically put forward two proposals, the Operational point of Contact Proposal and the Special circumstances proposal, neither of which has received support from more than three of the six GNSO constituencies. The operational point of contact proposal has a simple majority of support within the WHOIS task force.

The options open to the Council would be to submit the report to the ICANN Board for a decision or to consider forming one or more working groups to engage in further study to get stronger support for the recommendations presented to the ICANN Board.

There was general agreement to form a single working group for further study.

The Council passed the following resolution:
The GNSO Council resolves:

1) To acknowledge the completion of the Whois TF work and note we have received and discussed their report, and thank the task force for their work

2) To create a working group of affected stakeholders:

- including GNSO constituency, law enforcement and community
participants,

- whose work is to be completed within 120 days

- that will work to examine the issues raised with respect to the policy recommendations of the task force and make recommendations concerning how those policies may be improved to address these issues, namely:

a. define the roles, responsibilities, and requirements of the operational point of contact, and what happens if they are not
fulfilled.

b. how legitimate interests will access registration data no longer published via Whois,

c. whether a distinction should be made between the registration contact information published based on the nature of the registered name holder (for example, legal vs. natural persons) or its use of the domain name.

The motion carried by 20 votes in favour.

Kristina Rosette, and Avri Doria, voted against the motion.
Ute Decker had already left the meeting at the time of the vote, but requested that her vote against the motion be noted.

Decision 3

The GNSO Council resolves:

1) To acknowledge the completion of the Whois TF work and note we have received and discussed their report, and thank the task force for their work

2) To create a working group of affected stakeholders:

- including GNSO constituency, law enforcement and community participants,

- whose work is to be completed within 120 days

- that will work to examine the issues raised with respect to the policy recommendations of the task force and make recommendations concerning how those policies may be improved to address these issues, namely:

a. define the roles, responsibilities, and requirements of the operational point of contact, and what happens if they are not fulfilled.

b. how legitimate interests will access registration data no longer published via Whois,

c. whether a distinction should be made between the registration contact information published based on the nature of the registered name holder (for example, legal vs. natural persons) or its use of the domain name.

Item 4. any other business

Alan Greenberg, ALAC liaison to the GNSO Council, drew attention to the fact that the ALAC was preparing to ask the ICANN staff to produce an issues report on the add-grace period, and invited GNSO constituency members to assist.

Bruce Tonkin formally closed the meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.

The meeting ended: 12 :20 UTC

Next GNSO Council teleconference will be on 12 April 2007 at 12:00 UTC.
see: Calendar

Summary of Work Items arising from the minutes:

1. Bruce Tonkin, in collaboration with the ICANN staff, to create a Statement of work for the WHOIS working group to be approved at the next Council meeting on 12 April 2007