GNSO Council Open meeting LA Minutes
| 31 October 2007
Proposed agenda and documents List of attendees: 19 Council Members GNSO Council Liaisons Rita Rodin - ICANN Board member - remote participation Avri Doria chaired the meeting.
Olof Nordling presented the issue Jon Bing added that there was no agreement on the protection of the abbreviations or names on the international level, but that in many translations, there was explicit prohibition to use those abbreviations to confuse with the membership of the nation in the international organizations under discussion. Kristina Rosette, seconded by Jon Bing proposed Whereas, the Council has previously requested and received both the 15June 2007 "GNSO Issues Report on Dispute Handling for IGO Names and Abbreviations" Whereas, the Council believes that further work on the draft IGO Domain Name Dispute Resolution Procedure is appropriate before voting on whether to initiate a policy development process on this issue; and Whereas, the Intellectual Property Constituency is willing to lead a small ad hoc group to review and consider a proposed draft dispute resolution procedure, Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Council authorizes the creation of a small ad hoc group of interested informed and representative stakeholders and members of the GAC to review, consider and propose as Discussion indicated that the motion should be more specific with an explicit statement of scope. Avri Doria called for a roll call vote. The resolution did not pass. 12 votes in favour 8 Votes against: 5 Abstentions: Philip Sheppard and Sophia Bekele - Absent (one vote each) Whereas the Issues Report on Domain Tasting has been released and discussed The GNSO council resolves to initiate a PDP to address the issues set forth in the Issues Report by Staff and in the Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group and encourages staff to apply ICANN's fee collections to names Ross Rader, though not for domain tasting, was not in favour of initiating a policy development process (PDP) because, in his view, there were practical steps that ICANN staff could take immediately to address the issue of tasting such as ending the waiver of fees on domains that are tasted during the 5-day grace period. Robin Gross expressed concern on commencing a PDP based on the Final Outcomes Report. Dan Halloran confirmed that the waiver of fees on domains that are tasted during the 5-day add grace period could be ended by a budget process in consultation with the ICANN Board and the Registrars. Tim Ruiz supported Ross and agreed with Dan Halloran that the transaction fee change did not require a PDP to become part of the budget, thus neither would any modification require it. However, Tim urged Council to avoid forming a task force if a PDP were initiated. Comments from the floor: Kurt Pritz responded that anything was possible and a process could be mapped out with a timetable attached. Avri Doria called for a voice vote on the motion proposed by Mike Rodenbaugh, seconded by Kristina Rosette and amended by Ross Rader. 18 Votes in favour: 5 votes against: Adrian Kinderis (2 votes), Tom Keller (2 votes), Avri Doria (one vote). 2 Votes abstaining: Ross Rader (2 votes). Philip Sheppard and Sophia Bekele - Absent (one vote each). Decision 1: The GNSO council resolves to initiate a PDP to address the issues set forth in the Issues Report by Staff and in the Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group and encourages staff to apply ICANN's fee collections to names registered and subsequently deregistered during the add-grace period. Avri Doria called for a voice vote on the motion proposed by Mike Rodenbaugh, seconded by Kristina Rosette with the accepted amendment that 'Olof Nordling' be replaced with 'the Whereas, the GNSO Council has resolved to initiate a Policy Development Process on Domain Tasting, and pursuant to Sections 4 and 8 of Annex A of the Bylaws, resolves as follows: 1. To request that each constituency appoint a representative to solicit the constituency's views on the issues presented in the Issues Report by Staff and in the Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group. Each such representative is asked to submit a Constituency Statement to the ICANN staff manager within thirty-five (35) calendar days of this resolution. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Decision 2 1. To request that each constituency appoint a representative to solicit the constituency's views on the issues presented in the Issues Report by Staff and in the Outcomes Report of the ad hoc group. Each such representative is asked to submit a Constituency Statement to the ICANN staff manager within thirty-five (35) calendar days of this resolution. Whereas the WHOIS Task Force has delivered its report and Resolved: The council further requests that the staff consult with the GNSO and the community at large once it has developed this proposed implementation plan. Motion #2 offered by Kristina Rosette, seconded by Mike Rodenbaugh (i) The GNSO Council has considered the reports of the WHOIS Working Group and WHOIS Task Force, and; Therefore be it resolved; (i) That, with regret, the GNSO Council advises the ICANN staff and Board of Directors of the lack of general consensus on the key issues and solutions pertaining to gTLD WHOIS, and; Ross Rader proposed that the motions be entered as read. Avri Doria, seconded by Ross Rader proposed: Whereas the WHOIS Task Force has delivered its report and The motion did not pass 17 votes against: Mike Rodenbaugh, Bilal Beiram, Ute Decker, Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua, Tony Harris, Tony Holmes, Greg Ruth, Jon Bing, Robin Gross, Norbert Klein, (one vote each) 7 votes in favour: Adrian Kinderis, Ross Rader, Tom Keller, (2 votes each) Avri Doria (one vote) 1 abstention: Mawaki Chango Philip Sheppard and Sophia Bekele were absent, and did not vote. Motion 2 WHEREAS; 2. The GNSO Council acknowledges that the broad range of stakeholders with interests in this issue led to a wide range of views of what the policy issues are and how to best address those policy issues with solutions that can be supported by the consensus of the community: 3. The GNSO Council observes that the Working Group failed to reach agreement on several of the key issues identified in the charter of the Working Group and 4. That broadly, the scope of the issues in this area evolved substantially over the term of this Policy Development Process since it was originally chartered: and 5. A comprehensive, objective and quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system will benefit future GNSO policy development efforts: and 6. The rights and requirements of natural persons, the legal and business communities, anti-crime and law enforcement and registrars in the areas of privacy, access, enforcement, investigation, consumer protection and research would benefit from future policy development by the GNSO. THEREFORE, Be it resolved that the GNSO Council; 2. Formally ends the Policy Development Process on gTLD Whois without making any recommendations for specific policy changes to ICANN’s Board of Director, and 3. Recognizes the demand for future policy development including, but not limited to, ensuring appropriate privacy safeguards for natural persons, lawful access to data for rights enforcement, consumer protection, law enforcement and anti-crime purposes and will immediately initiate the following sequential actions: 1) Council shall provide additional definition regarding the potential data gathering and study requirements 2) staff shall provide the Council with rough cost estimates for various components of data gathering and studies no later 4. May initiate policy development activities in this area, as supported by the findings of the data-gathering and study activities upon their completion. 7 Votes against: Adrian Kinderis, Tom Keller, Ross Rader, (2 votes 1 abstention: Mawaki Chango (one vote). Philip Sheppard and Sophia Bekele - Absent (one vote each). Avri Doria opened the Council discussion on motion 2 stating that Ross Rader had sent an amendment to motion 2 to the Council list, Kristina Rosette in accepting it as a friendly amendment, proposed further amendments to Ross's amendment to read in clause 6 after "anti-crime" "legal and business communities". b) to focus the study work required to line up against specific policy areas where we need further information in order to understand the scope of issues or work required. A broad study of Whois will probably be as effective and useful as a broad PDP on Whois. However, narrower more focused study - or several of them even - will likely bring us much closer to understanding the issues we need to properly consider in our policy work." 3. The GNSO Council observes that the Working Group failed to reach agreement on several of the key issues identified in the charter of the Working Group, and 4. That broadly, the scope of the issues in this area have evolved substantially over the term of this Policy Development Process since it was originally chartered, and 5. A comprehensive, objective and quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system will benefit future GNSO policy development efforts, and; 6. The rights and requirements of natural persons, anti-crime and law enforcement, registries and registrars in the areas of privacy, access, enforcement, investigation, consumer protection and research would benefit from future policy development by the GNSO. THEREFORE, Be it resolved that the GNSO Council: 2. Formally ends the Policy Development Process on gTLD Whois without making any recommendations for specific policy changes to ICANN's Board of Directors, and 3. Recognizes the demand for future policy development in several key areas and will immediately undertake to identify what specific policy development work is required and create a data-gathering and study plan to support this policy development no later than February 15th, 2008. 4. May initiate policy development activities in this area, as supported by the findings of the data-gathering and study activities upon their completion. Norbert Klein noted that he disagreed, because it was not clear, what the inclusion of the amendment to the amendment would mean, adding the "legal community". What was intended by "legal community", Law Enforcement was a clear and identifiable entity in different national laws but "legal community" was a vague Avri Doria clarified that Motion 2 specified a schedule and instructions for the Council to start working on immediately and to produce responses by February 15th, while in Motion 1 or Motion 3, there were outstanding issues that Council and the ICANN legal staff would have to review if the motions passed. Comments at the public microphone: Jordyn Buchanan, who chaired various previous working groups and chaired the Task Force that produced the recommendation that was the subject of motion 1, did not support more studies and believed that the open-ended way Motion 2 was currently presented was not useful. Gathering additional data based on specific questions would be more productive. From: 3. Recognizes the demand for future policy development in several key areas and will immediately undertake to identify what specific policy development work is required and create a data-gathering and study plan to support this policy development no later than February 15th, 2008. Bruce Tonkin, ICANN Board director speaking from the floor, observed that there were two distinct parts of Motion 2; one dealing with the conclusion of the current policy development process, which is set out in the bylaws, and the other commissioning some further work of the staff. Having consulted with ICANN’s Deputy General Counsel, Dan Halloran, Bruce advised the Council to separate those two issues. Bruce said the Council needed to vote on whether to accept the policy recommendations resulting from the policy development process and report to the ICANN Board. If a supermajority vote was achieved, the report would go to the Board with a supermajority recommendation. If the supermajority vote was not reached, the report would still go to the Board as a Board Report, but with the positions of the different constituencies and the result of the vote. Given this, Bruce suggested the Council make a single motion resolving the PDP. Bruce recommended that regarding the motion specifying the data collection, the Council give it more thought and vote on it at the next meeting of council. This would give the Council time to consult and get the wording of the direction to staff, given the big cost implications. Bruce agreed with previous comments by Milton Mueller that it is necessary to bound the scope of further study and allow time to consult with constituents and the GAC. Arvi Doria said that these were true. Avri Doria asked Kristina Rosette if she accepted Chuck’s proposal. Kristina Rosette said she accepted Chuck’s proposal. Avri Doria said the first vote is on the amendment and would be a roll call vote as it was the only way to replace appropriate access with lawful access in this clause. Avri Doria began to take the roll call vote and took Cary Karp’s vote, which was in favour. 17 Votes in favour: 7 votes against: Adrian kinderis, Tom Keller, Ross Rader, (2 votes each) Avri Doria, (one vote). 1 abstention : Mawaki Chango (one vote). Philip Sheppard and Sophia Bekele - Absent (one vote each) The Motion passed with a supermajority. Motion #3 - conditional motion offered by Ross Rader, seconded by Mawaki Chango (i) That, with regret, the GNSO Council advises the ICANN staff and Board of Directors of the lack of general consensus on the key issues and solutions pertaining to gTLD WHOIS, and; 13 votes against: 10 in favour: Cary Karp (two votes) had left at the time of voting. Total 23 votes Item 6: Registrar Transfer policy update 7.1 Vote of thanks to Liz Willaims Whereas Dr Liz Williams, as Senior Policy Counselor for ICANN, has been the ICANN Staff Manager assigned to support the GNSO's Policy Development Process (PDP) on new gTLDs, since December 2005. Whereas this PDP trialled a number of new approaches in GNSO policy development, including the use of inter-sessional face-to-face meetings, calls for formal papers with the ability for the authors to present those papers and have dialog with the committee, and the use of working groups to analyse topics such as IDNs, reserved names, and protecting the rights of others. The success of the working groups became the foundation of the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working Group recommendations on using working groups as the main approach for policy development. Whereas Liz worked tirelessly to secure support for many of these initiatives, and pull together a huge amount of public input, meeting transcripts, and GNSO constituency contributions into a final set of principles, recommendations, and guidelines, along with a large range of supporting material that will assist the ICANN staff in implementing the policy. Whereas Liz completed the final report on the policy for new gTLDs in August 2007, finished her term of office with ICANN in September 2007. It is resolved that the GNSO expresses its sincere gratitude for her service to the ICANN community and wishes her every success in her next endeavours. Avri Doria thanked the Council members whose terms ended and were leaving the Council and presented those present with a small token of appreciation, namely Ross Rader, Registrar constituency, Cary Karp gTLD Registry constituency, Sophia Bekele, Nominating Committee appointee and Mawaki Chango NCUC. Avri Doria thanked everyone for their participation and adjourned the meeting. The meeting ended at 12:30 local time. Next GNSO Council teleconference will be on Tuesday 20 November 2007 at 21:00 UTC.
|