Proposed agenda and documents
The meeting started at 15:05UTC.
List of attendees:
Andrei Kolesnikov NCA – Non Voting
Contracted Parties House
Registrar Stakeholder Group: Stéphane van Gelder, Tim Ruiz, Adrian Kinderis.
gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group: Chuck Gomes, Caroline Greer, Edmon Chung
Nominating Committee Appointee (NCA): Terry Davis - absent with apologies
Non-Contracted Parties House
Commercial Stakeholder Group (CSG): , Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, Jaime Wagner, Kristina Rosette, Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, David Taylor.
Non Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG): Rafik Dammak, Debra Hughes, Wendy Seltzer, William Drake, Rosemary Sinclair. Mary Wong joined after the roll call.
Nominating Committee Appointee (NCA): Olga Cavalli
GNSO Council Liaisons/Observers
Alan Greenberg – ALAC Liaison
Han Chuan Lee – ccNSO Observer
ICANN Staff
Kurt Pritz - Senior Vice President, Services
David Olive - Vice President, Policy Development
Denise Michel - Special Advisor to the CEO
Liz Gasster - Senior Policy Counselor, ICANN Policy Support
Margie Milam - Senior Policy Counselor
Marika Konings - Policy Director
Julie Hedlund - Policy Director
Rob Hoggarth - Senior Policy Director
Nick Ashton-Hart - Senior Director for Participation and Engagement
Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat
For detailed information of the meeting, please refer to:
Item 1: Administrative Items
1.2 Update any Statements of Interest
No updates
1 3 Review/amend the agenda
- No changes
1.4. Note the status of minutes for the following Council meetings per the new Council Operating Procedures:
• 28 January meeting – Approved on 10 February 2010
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-council-28jan10-en.htm
Item 2: Vertical Integration (VI) Policy Development Process (PDP)
2.2 Charter Drafting Team volunteers:
Berry Cobb, Mike Rodenbaugh - Business Constituency
Brian Cute - Afilias gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group
Tony Harris - ISPCP Constituency
Avri Doria, Milton Mueller - Non Commercial Stakeholder Group
Jeff Eckhaus, Jean-Christophe Vignes, Jothan Frakes - Registrars Stakeholder Group
Kristina Rosette, Victoria Carrington, Austin Scott - IPC
Chuck Gomes - GNSO Council chair (Ex-Officio Observer)
Olga Cavalli - NCA - GNSO Council vice-chair
Stéphane van Gelder - DT Coordinator - GNSO Council vice-chair
ICANN Staff: Margie.Milam - Staff support, Liz Gasster, Dan Halloran, Amy Stathos, Marika Konings, Glen de Saint Géry, Gisella Gruber-White
2.5 Stéphane van Gelder noted that the target date for the recommended charter is 26 February 2010.
Item 3: Prioritization of GNSO work
Olga Cavalli reported that weekly meetings continue, the work is complex and taking longer than expected. The team will meet face to face in Nairobi and have options to share with the Council.
Liz Gasster noted the overextension of GNSO resources, not only in the Policy but also in Services and Legal departments and suggested several options for alleviating the situation. These could include slowing down, reconsidering or temporarily delaying some of the work, engaging community participants more actively in writing assignments, winding down the GNSO Improvements efforts, and adopting regular meeting schedules.
It was noted that the community resources are equally overextended.
Item 4: Proposal for GNSO endorsement of Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) Review Team volunteers
Bill Drake gave an overview of the Proposed Process for GNSO Endorsement of Nominees to the 2010 Affirmation of Commitments Accountability and Transparency Review Team
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-endorsement-nominees-process-proposal-10feb10-en.pdf
and the Affirmation of Commitment Drafting Team (AoC DT) Action Plan for Development of GNSO Endorsement of Review Team Volunteers
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-endorsement-volunteers-action-plan-10feb10-en.pdf
Bill Drake seconded by Chuck Gomes, proposed the motion on the Proposed Process for GNSO Endorsement of Nominees to the AoC Accountability and Transparency RT as amended.
WHEREAS, in furtherance of ICANN’s responsibilities under the Affirmation of Commitments, applicants are being sought to volunteer to serve on the review team for Accountability and Transparency
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03feb10-en.htm;
WHEREAS, the Accountability and Transparency review team will include members endorsed by the GNSO in its efforts;
WHEREAS, the GNSO Council desires to adopt a one-time process to provide endorsements for applicants to serve on the first Accountability and Transparency review;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
RESOLVED, that the Endorsement Process described in the attached document
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-endorsement-nominees-process-proposal-10feb10-en.pdf
is hereby approved;
RESOLVED FURTHER, that each Stakeholder Group and the GNSO Council Nominating Committee appointees should immediately commence their selection processes in accordance with the Endorsement Process;
RESOLVED FURTHER, ICANN Staff is directed to post and distribute the Endorsement Process as widely as possible to all GNSO related groups in an effort to inform qualified applicants of the important work of the Accountability and Transparency review team;
RESOLVED FURTHER, the Council shall form an Evaluation Team made up of one Councilor from each SG plus one Nominating Committee Appointee in its meeting on 18 February to assess the responses and report to the Council list not later than 10 March or 14 March;
RESOLVED FURTHER, ICANN Staff is directed to schedule a Special Council Teleconference call on 15, 16 or 17 March at a time that maximizes Councilor participation for the purpose of finalizing GNSO endorsements;
RESOLVED FURTHER, the Affirmation of Commitments Review Drafting Team is requested to continue its work to develop a longer-term process for Council consideration in April.
The motion passed by a roll call vote.
18 Votes in favour
6 votes in favour: Contracted Parties House
Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Caroline Greer, Stéphane van Gelder, Tim Ruiz, Adrian Kinderis.
Absent: Terry Davis NCA
12 votes in favour: Non Contracted Parties House
Zahid Jamil, Jaime Wagner, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, Kristina Rosette, David Taylor, Rafik Dammak, Rosemary Sinclair, Debra Hughes, Mary Wong, Wendy Seltzer, Bill Drake, and Olga Cavalli.
One abstention Mike Rodenbaugh - reason for the abstention:
"I abstained from the vote on AoC RT selections due to the gender diversity provisions, which I think are unfair and unnecessary. ICANN is open to everyone and always has been open to everyone. So I see no reason why ICANN should be promoting one group of people over any other, based solely on irrelevant personal characteristics such as gender, race, religion or sexual orientation, etc."
An evaluation team to assess the responses and report to the Council list was formed, consisting of:
Adrian Kinderis - Registrar Stakeholder Group
Caroline Greer – gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – Commercial Stakeholder Group
Bill Drake – Non Commercial Stakeholder Group
Olga Cavalli – NCA
Margie Milam – Policy Staff support
Item 5: Nairobi Meeting Planning
Chuck Gomes informed Council that he would not be attending the Nairobi meetings in person, but remotely and that the vice chairs would assume the chairing duties between them.
Chuck Gomes committed to submit the following draft Plan for the Joint GAC/GNSO meeting in Nairobi to Janis Karklins the chair of the GAC.
The GAC proposed the first two subject areas below and the third was suggested in the GNSO. Each could be discussed for up to 20 minutes, or we could select two of the three to discuss for a half hour each. Included below are examples of the kinds of questions we might consider addressing under each heading.
1. New gTLD Implementation and Expressions of Interest
a. Clarification questions from the GNSO:
i. Do GAC members have any remaining concerns with respect to geographic and intellectual property protections?
ii. The GAC proposed that some additional studies be conducted before new gTLDs are launched; what negative effects, if any, could be foreseen if such studies are not completed before the launch?
iii. The GAC has questioned the desirability of a single fee structure for new gTLDs. How might variable fees affect market entry and the larger Internet environment? How would they impact the distribution and recovery of costs?
iv. The GAC has raised a number of concerns about the suitability and time frame of the EOI model. Does it have specific suggestions as to how the model could be improved, or a superior alternative model to suggest?b. Questions or comments from GAC members:
2. The Affirmation of Commitments
a. Clarification questions from the GNSO:
i. How would GAC members define the meaning of the ”public interest” in relation to ICANN's identity and mission?
ii. Do GAC members have any specific suggestions on how ICANN's various bodies, such as the GNSO, could more effectively embody public interest standards in their work programs?
iii. Do GAC members have any thoughts or expectations regarding the relevance to the GNSO's policy development process of any recommendations that may be advanced by the AoC Accountability and Transparency Review Team?b. Questions or comments from GAC members
3. ICANN in the Wider International Environment
a. Discussion questions from the GNSO:
i. Can GAC members explain the relationship to ICANN in general and to the GAC principles in particular of the ongoing intergovernmental discussions (e.g., in the ITU and CSTD) concerning Enhanced Cooperation on Globally Applicable Public Policy Principles?
ii. Can GAC members help us to understand the objectives and prospects of the various other proposals that have been advanced in the ITU (some of which could be taken up by its October 2010 Plenipotentiary Conference) concerning such topics as the provision of registry services, the harmonization and coordination of ccTLD policies, internationalized domain names, the interface between international laws and treaties and Internet governance, security and stability, IPV6, dispute resolution, and so on?b. Questions or comments from GAC members
Suggested Meeting Mechanics
• GNSO Chair or Vice Chair will co-chair the meeting with the GAC Chair.
• As much as possible, GNSO Councilors and GAC Members will be seated at the meeting table.
• The meeting will be open.
• Time permitting; comments from Community Members will be permitted.
In addition to the Affirmation of Commitments topic for the Joint ccNSO/GNSO lunch meeting on Monday 8 March, the following topic from the JIG was proposed: What will requested and publicly displayed in IANA Whois for IDN TLDs. Edmon Chung will provide an introduction statement for this.
The proposed topic for the Board/GNSO/Staff dinner on Sunday, 7 March, is 'Closure of the new gTLD process'. Councillors are invited to add other suggestions via the mailing list for a second discussion topic.
Kristina Rosette requested that the Council meeting scheduling be such as to maximize the remote participation of the greatest number of absentee Councilors.
Item 6: Status updates
Following from the Status Update on the ICANN Board meeting on 4 February 2010, a question arose about the process for the Board members to recuse themselves from the Vertical Integration discussion.
Staff was requested to provide clarification on the issue to the Council via the Council mailing list.
In the interest of time, Councillors are encouraged to send questions to the Council mailing list on other Status Updates.
Item 7: Any Other Business
Kurt Pritz commented on the Special Trademark Issues Report Summary of Public Comments and highlighted the following:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/summary-analysis-special-trademarks-issues-report-15feb10-en.pdf
The t rademark protection excerpt includes three areas:
- URS Uniform rapid Suspension
- TheTrademark Clearing House.
- Post Delegation Dispute Resolution.
Essentially the same Special Trademark Issues (STI) report wording will appear in the Draft Applicant Guide Book.
Noteworthy, regarding IDNs in the proposed model is that restrictions on three characters for IDNs are lifted under certain circumstances.
A path forward is projected in IDN variance management.
A memo provides benchmarking of Registry operations for a number of gTLD and ccTLD registries.
A document was posted discussing the Registry agreements.
Following a question on when the Board agenda becomes available, staff was requested to explore the issue with regard to the policy for the public posting of agendas 15 working days before a meeting.
Item 8: The updated GNSO Project Status List
Council members are reminded to review the updated GNSO Project Status List and comment on the Council mailing list.
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf
Item 8.1 Questions/comments
There were no further comments or questions.
Chuck Gomes adjourned the GNSO Council meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.
The meeting was adjourned at 17:04 UTC.
Next GNSO Council meeting will be on Wednesday, 10 March 2010 in Nairobi at 08:00 local time (05:00 UTC.)
See: Calendar