Re: [council] GNSO Council Teleconference Draft Minutes, 5 August 2004

[Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

These minutes only contain the decisions and no deliberations. Is that
what we want?

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, at 15:01 [=GMT+0200], GNSO SECRETARIAT wrote:

> [To: council[at]gnso.icann.org]
>
> Dear Councillors,
>
> Please find attached in html and text version the draft minutes of the GNSO
> Council teleconference held on August 5 2004.
>
> Pease let me know whether you would like any changes made.
>
> Thank you very much.
> Kind regards,
>
> Glen de Saint Géry
>
> ****************************************************************************
> ***
> 05 August 2004
>
> Proposed agenda and related documents
>
> List of attendees:
> Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business users C.
> Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business users C.
> Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business users C.
> Greg Ruth - ISCPC - absent - apologies - proxy to Tony Harris
> Antonio Harris - ISCPC
> Tony Holmes - ISCPC - absent - apologies - proxy to Tony Harris
> Thomas Keller- Registrars - proxy to Alick Wilson for item 3 because of
> conflict of interests
> Ross Rader - Registrars - proxy to Alick Wilson for item 3 because of
> conflict of interests
> Bruce Tonkin - Registrars - proxy to Alick Wilson for item 3 because of
> conflict of interests
> Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries
> Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries
> Cary Karp - gTLD registries
> Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - joined call late
> Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies -
> proxy to Lucy Nichols
> Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C.
> Jisuk Woo - Non Commercial users C. - absent - apologies- proxy to Marc
> Schneiders
> Marc Schneiders - Non Commercial users C.
> Carlos Afonso - Non Commercial users C. - joined call late
> Alick Wilson
> Demi Getschko
> Amadeu Abril I Abril - proxy to Alick Wilson for item 3 because of conflict
> of interests
>
>
> 17 Council Members
>
> GNSO Council Rule of Procedures do not limit the number of proxies one
> person may hold.
> All Council members confirmed their willingness to exercise the proxy votes
> they held.
>
> Kurt Pritz - Vice President, Business Operations
> Tina Dam - Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
> Barbara Roseman - ICANN Staff Manager
>
> Thomas Roessler - ALAC Liaison
>
> Michael Palage - ICANN Board (GNSO seat 14) - observer
>
>
> Paul Verhoef - Vice President, Policy Development Support - absent -
> apologies
> Christopher Wilkinson - GAC Secretariat - absent - apologies
> Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent
>
> Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat
>
> MP3 Recording
> Quorum present at 12:05 UTC,
>
> Bruce Tonkin and Philip Sheppard chaired this teleconference.
>
> Item 1: Approval of Agenda
>
> Agenda approved
>
>
> Item 2: Approval of the Minutes of 16 June 2004 and Minutes of 12 July 2004
>
> Bruce Tonkin seconded by Ken Stubbs moved the adoption of the Minutes of 16
> June 2004 and the Minutes of 12 July 2004
>
> The motion carried unanimously
>
> Decision 1: The Minutes of 16 June 2004 and the Minutes of 12 July 2004 were
> adopted
>
>
> Item 3: For decision: Criteria for designating a successor for the .net
> registry Version 9 (revised)
>
> Bruce Tonkin, in view of his conflict of interest declaration with respect
> to vote on .net criteria, handed the chair to Philip Sheppard.
>
> Philip Sheppard asked whether there were other conflict of interest
> declarations.
> Thomas Keller , Amadeu Abril lAbril, and Ross Rader declared conflict of
> interests and gave their proxies with undirected votes to Alick Wilson.
>
> Philip Sheppard read the proposed resolution before Council:
>
> "In response to the letter from Paul Verhoef on 31 March 2004 requesting
> that the GNSO provide advice with a consensus statement defining the
> criteria to be applied in the selection of a successor registry operator for
> .net, and in accordance with section 5.2 and 4.3 of the .net registry
> agreement, the GNSO recommends that the following criteria (as detailed in
> the Final report of the GNSO subcommittee ) be applied:
>
> - absolute criteria related to the targeting
> - absolute criteria related to continuity
> - absolute criteria related to policy compliance
> - absolute criteria related to stability, security, technical and financial
> competence
> - relative criteria related to promotion of competition - relative criteria
> relating to stability, security, technical and financial competence
> - relative criteria related to existing registry services,
> and provides the attached written report which includes all substantive
> submissions to the GNSO relating to this recommendation, as required in
> section 4.3.1 of the .net agreement. Absolute criteria are thresholds which
> an applicant is expected to meet, and relative criteria become relevant once
> absolute criteria are met and are recommended as a basis for comparison and
> evaluation of competing applications."
>
> Alick Wilson commented that he had been entrusted with 4 proxies, that the
> report before Council had the unanimous supported of the GNSO Council .net
> subcommittee, that there had been comprehensive opportunity for outreach,
> that the report had been open to two public comment periods and that the
> GNSO Constituencies were all consulted.
>
>
> Voting: 21 Votes in favour, 1 vote against (counting for 2), 1 abstention
> (counting for 2), 2 councillors absent.
>
> The resolution was passed by the GNSO Council.
>
> Decision 2: The resolution (as above) on Designating a successor operator
> for the .net registry was approved as a consensus statement, having a
> greater than two-thirds majority vote.
>
> Ken Stubbs, supported by Marilyn Cade and Cary Karp proposed that the
> statement crafted at the suggestion of the gTLD registry constituency
> members at their constituency meeting on August 4 2004, be included as a
> covering letter to the report.
>
> Bruce Tonkin proposed voting by name on the text and proxy votes were
> reconfirmed.
>
> "The GNSO believes that all material provisions of the new .net Agreement
> should be made known to the public in the draft and final RFPs. This
> includes, but is not limited to, any information regarding the proposed fee
> structure to be paid by the subsequent .net registry operator to ICANN. Only
> with such information can an applicant truly propose a realistic, viable,
> and appropriate business, technical and financial model. In addition, such
> information known in advance by the applicants will also help in ensuring a
> smooth negotiation process with the successor operator after its selection."
>
> Voting: 24 votes in favour, 3 abstentions.
>
> The motion was approved by the GNSO Council.
>
>
> Decision 3: "The GNSO believes that all material provisions of the new .net
> Agreement should be made known to the public in the draft and final RFPs.
> This includes, but is not limited to, any information regarding the proposed
> fee structure to be paid by the subsequent .net registry operator to ICANN.
> Only with such information can an applicant truly propose a realistic,
> viable, and appropriate business, technical and financial model. In
> addition, such information known in advance by the applicants will also help
> in ensuring a smooth negotiation process with the successor operator after
> its selection."
>
> Philip Sheppard seconded by Ken Stubbs moved a motion:
>
> Whereas, the GNSO Council .net subcommittee had completed its work, the
> subcommittee be formally dissolved.
>
>
> The motion was unanimously approved by the GNSO Council.
>
> Decision 4: Whereas, the GNSO Council .net subcommittee had completed its
> work, the subcommittee be formally dissolved.
>
> Philip Sheppard formally handed the chair back to Bruce Tonkin.
>
> Item 4: Any Other Business.
>
> Bruce Tonkin reported that the draft initial report, on the Procedure for
> use by ICANN in considering requests for consent and related contractual
> amendments to allow changes in the architecture or operation of a gTLD
> Registry, published on July 15 2004, brought to Council's attention during
> the GNSO Council meeting in Kuala Lumpur on July 20, 2004 had not received
> any comment. He proposed a GNSO Council teleconference on August 19, 2004 to
> discuss the report and approve putting the report out for a 20 day public
> comment period.
>
> Marilyn Cade proposed adding to the next meeting agenda, the process as
> related to new gTLDs.
>
> Grant Forsyth reminded Council that the ICANN Nominating Committee had
> extended the deadline for Statements of Interest to 25 August 2004 and urged
> councillors to participate in the NomCom process in actively seeking
> qualified candidates for key positions within ICANN.
>
>
> Bruce Tonkin declared GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for
> participating.
> The meeting ended: 13:05 UTC.
>
> Next GNSO Council teleconference will be held on Thursday 19 August 2004 at
> 12:00 UTC
> see: Calendar
>
>
>
>
>