Agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting 14 February 2013
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 13 September 2012 for the GNSO Council and updated.
- An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
- An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.
Coordinated Universal Time 11:00 UTC
03:00 Los Angeles; 06:00 Washington; 11:00 London; 12:00 Paris; 00:00 Wellington
Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed.
GNSO Council meeting audio cast
Item 1: Administrative matters (10 minutes)
1.1 Roll Call
1.2 Statement of interest updates
1.3 Review/amend agenda
1.4. Note the status of minutes for the Council meeting on 17 January 2013 and the minutes of the Council meeting on 21 January 2013 have been approved per the GNSO Operating Procedures.
Item 2: Opening Remarks from Chair (5 minutes)
Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes/topics
Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
After careful review of the GNSO Project List, the Council Chairs propose to formally close the following projects and remove them from the Project List, noting that either work is being undertaken on the subject outside of the GNSO and/or that no further GNSO activity is foreseen in the near future.
Note: Any Council member can re-open the discussion on any of these items in the future, should it be deemed necessary. These projects are as follows:
- Outreach Task Force
- RAPWG Recommendation on Cross-TLD Registration Scam
Item 4: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION – Recent meetings in Amsterdam & LA (15 minutes)
Meetings have recently taken place in Amsterdam & LA. This item provides an opportunity for an update on any key themes or issues arising.
4.1 Update from VCs (Mason Cole & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben)
4.3 Next steps (if any)
Item 5: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations (15 Minutes)
ICANN's CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman Proposal developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment. http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm. ICANN's CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a "limited preventative registration mechanism" which is also currently available for public comment. A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN's CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013.
Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2). The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken.
The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations.
5.1 Update (Mason Cole)
5.3 Next Steps
Item 6: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – Board requested advice on second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms (15 minutes)
At its 26 November 2012 meeting, the Board requested that the GNSO continue its work on policy recommendations on top and second-level protections for certain IGO and INGO names on an expedited basis.
In addition, the Board requested that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than 28 February 2013 if it is aware of any concern such as with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for certain IGO names and acronyms by inclusion on a Reserved Names List in section 220.127.116.11.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program. The specific IGO names to be protected shall be those names or acronyms that: 1) qualify under the current existing criteria to register a domain name in the .int gTLD; and 2) have a registered .int domain OR a determination of eligibility under the .int criteria; and 3) apply to ICANN to be listed on the reserved names list for the second level prior to the delegation of any new gTLDs by no later than 28 February 2013.
6.1 Update (Thomas Rickert)
6.3 Next steps (if any)
Item 7: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION – The issue of "closed generic" TLDs (15 minutes)
The New gTLD Program Committee recently directed the ICANN CEO to request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of "closed generic" TLDs, concurrent with the opening of the public comment forum and if the GNSO wishes, to provide such guidance. Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the close of the public comment forum. (7 March)
7.1 Background (Staff)
7.3 Next steps (if any)
Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION – Policy vs. Implementation (10 minutes)
The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset.
Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic.
8.2 Next steps
Item 9: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (15 minutes)
At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services. The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study.
9.1 – Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman)
9.2 – Discussion
9.3 – Next steps
Item 10: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION – Planning for Beijing (15 minutes)
Making the most out of the face-to-face meeting time available at the ICANN Meeting in Beijing will take some planning. Council VC Mason Cole is working with staff to lead this effort. The Council has the opportunity to discuss any initial plans and provide feedback
10.1 – Update (Mason Cole)
10.2 – Discussion
10.3 – Next steps
Item 11: Any Other Business (5 minutes)
Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3)
9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO Supermajority.
d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter through a simple majority vote of each House.
g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.
i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority of the other House."
Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4)
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council motions or measures.
a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
d. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become available.
4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.)
Local time between October and March, Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere
Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 11:00
California, USA (PST) UTC-8+0DST 03:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 06:00
Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
Montevideo, Uruguay (UYST) UTC-3+1DST 09:00
Edinburgh, Scotland (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 11:00
Abuja, Nigeria (WAT) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
Bonn, Germany (CEST) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
Stockholm, Sweden (CET) UTC+1+0DST 12:00
Ramat Hasharon, Israel(IST) UTC+2+0DST 13:00
Karachi, Pakistan (PKT ) UTC+5+0DST 16:00
Beijing/Hong Kong, China (HKT ) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
Perth, Australia (WST) UTC+8+0DST 19:00
Wellington, New Zealand (NZDT ) UTC+12+1DST 00:00 – next day
The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2013, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions)
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com