RE: [council] Proposed amendment to motion in item 10 - intended friendly

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 6:48 AM
To: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [council] Proposed amendment to motion in item 10 - intended
friendly

How about if we delete my #4 and make Tim's point #4 -- as follows:

4. To request an opinion of ICANN Staff Council as to which aspects of
registration abuse policies as discussed above may be within the scope of
GNSO policy development.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:59 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Proposed amendment to motion in item 10 - intended
friendly


I would like to propose an amendment to the motion on the abusive
registrations issues report. The purpose is to first get an opinion on
what aspects may or may not be in scope of GNSO policy work (within
registry picket fence, for example). Will explain further on the call.
The ammended motion would read:

Whereas:
1. ICANN's mission is to ensure the security and stability of the DNS,
and to develop policy reasonably related to that mission.
2. Various forms of DNS abuse, in isolation and/or in the aggregate,
cause a less secure and stable DNS.
3. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements and appended
registry-registrar agreements contain a provision such as Section 3.6.5
of the.info Registry Agreement, Appendix 8 :
3.6.5. (Registrars) acknowledge and agree that Afilias reserves the
right to deny, cancel or transfer any registration or transaction, or
place any
domain name(s) on registry lock, hold or similar status, that it deems
necessary, in its discretion; (1) to protect the integrity and stability
of the registry; (2) to comply with any applicable laws, government
rules or requirements, requests of law enforcement, or any dispute
resolution process; (3) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on
the part of Afilias, as well as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers,
directors, and employees; (4) per the terms of the registration
agreement or (5) to correct mistakes made by Afilias or any Registrar in
connection with a domain name registration.
Afilias also reserves the right to place upon registry lock, hold or
similar status a domain name during resolution of a dispute.
4. Afilias, the dotInfo Registry Operator, per its recent RSEP request,
has sought to clarify and implement its specific abusive registration
policy with respect to this provision. This request has been approved by
ICANN.
5. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements, notably the Verisign
contracts for .com and .net, have no such provision. Other gTLD registry
agreements do contain such provision, but the registry operators have
not developed or have inconsistently developed abusive registration
policies.

The GNSO Council is considering whether or not to request an Issues
Report from ICANN Staff with respect to the following:

1. To identify and describe the various provisions in existing and
previous gTLD registry and registry-registrar agreements which relate to
contracting parties' ability to take action in response to abuse.
2. To identify and describe various provisions in a representative
sampling of gTLD registration agreements which relate to contracting
parties' and/or registrants rights and obligations with respect to
abuse.
3. To identify and describe any previous discussion in ICANN fora which
substantively pertains to provisions of this nature in any of these
agreements.
4. To identify and describe potential options for further Council
consideration, relating to consistency and propriety of provisions of
this nature in all of these agreements.

Therefore the GNSO Council resolves to request an opinion of ICANN Staff
Council as to which aspects of registration abuse policies as discussed
above may be within the scope of GNSO policy development.


Tim 

-------- Original Motion --------

Motion on request for issues report on Registration Abuse Policies. (10
mins)
Motion: Mike Rodenbaugh Second: Greg Ruth
Whereas:
1. ICANN's mission is to ensure the security and stability of the DNS,
and to develop policy reasonably related to that mission.
2. Various forms of DNS abuse, in isolation and/or in the aggregate,
cause a less secure and stable DNS.
3. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements and appended
registry-registrar agreements contain a provision such as Section 3.6.5
of the.info Registry Agreement, Appendix 8 :
3.6.5. (Registrars) acknowledge and agree that Afilias reserves the
right to deny, cancel or transfer any registration or transaction, or
place any
domain name(s) on registry lock, hold or similar status, that it deems
necessary, in its discretion; (1) to protect the integrity and stability
of the registry; (2) to comply with any applicable laws, government
rules or requirements, requests of law enforcement, or any dispute
resolution process; (3) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on
the part of Afilias, as well as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers,
directors, and employees; (4) per the terms of the registration
agreement or (5) to correct mistakes made by Afilias or any Registrar in
connection with a domain name registration.
Afilias also reserves the right to place upon registry lock, hold or
similar status a domain name during resolution of a dispute.
4. Afilias, the dotInfo Registry Operator, per its recent RSEP request,
has sought to clarify and implement its specific abusive registration
policy with respect to this provision. This request has been approved by
ICANN.
5. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements, notably the Verisign
contracts for .com and .net, have no such provision. Other gTLD registry
agreements do contain such provision, but the registry operators have
not developed or have inconsistently developed abusive registration
policies.

The GNSO Council resolves to request an Issues Report from ICANN Staff
with respect to the following:

1. To identify and describe the various provisions in existing and
previous gTLD registry and registry-registrar agreements which relate to
contracting parties' ability to take action in response to abuse.
2. To identify and describe various provisions in a representative
sampling of gTLD registration agreements which relate to contracting
parties' and/or registrants rights and obligations with respect to
abuse.
3. To identify and describe any previous discussion in ICANN fora which
substantively pertains to provisions of this nature in any of these
agreements.
4. To identify and describe potential options for further Council
consideration, relating to consistency and propriety of provisions of
this nature in all of these agreements.