<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] GNSO Council drfat minutes 2 June 2005
- To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [council] GNSO Council drfat minutes 2 June 2005
- From: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:00:54 +0200
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org]
Dear Council Members,
Please find attached an html version of the draft minutes of the GNSO
Council meeting held on 2 June 2005.
Please let me know if you would like any changes made.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org
<!--#set var="bartitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagetitle" value="GNSO Council Teleconference Minutes"-->
<!--#set var="pagedate" value="2 June 2005"-->
<!--#set var="bgcell" value="#ffffff"-->
<!--#include virtual="/header.shtml"-->
<!--#exec cmd="/usr/bin/perl /etc/gnso/menu.pl 'GNSO Council Teleconference
Minutes'"-->
<p> </p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2 June 2005 </font> </p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Proposed <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-02jun05.shtml";>agenda and
related documents</a> </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>List of attendees:</b><br>
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C.<br>
Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business Users C. <br>
Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business Users C<br>
Greg Ruth - ISCPC <br>
Antonio Harris - ISCPC - absent - apologies - proxy to Tony Holmes/Greg
Ruth <br>
Tony Holmes - ISCPC<br>
Thomas Keller- Registrars <br>
Ross Rader - Registrars - absent - apologies - proxy to Bruce Tonkin/Tom
Keller <br>
Bruce Tonkin - Registrars <br>
Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries <br>
Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries <br>
Cary Karp - gTLD registries <br>
Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C <br>
Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C <br>
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. - absent<br>
Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users C.- - absent - apologies - proxy to Marc
Schneiders/Norbert Klein <br>
Marc Schneiders - Non Commercial Users C. - absent - apologies - proxy Robin
Gross/Norbert Klein/Tom Keller/Ross Rader/Bruce Tonkin <br>
Norbert Klein - Non Commercial Users C. <br>
Alick Wilson - absent - apologies - proxy to Maureen Cubberley/ Bruce
Tonkin <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maureen Cubberley</font></p>
<p> <font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">14 Council Members<br>
<br>
<b>ICANN Staff</b><br>
Paul Verhoef - Vice President, Policy Development Support - absent -
apologies <br>
Kurt Pritz - Vice President, Business Operations<br>
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination <br>
Maria Farrell - ICANN GNSO Policy Support Officer<br>
Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat <br>
<br>
<b>GNSO Council Liaisons</b><br>
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison<br>
Bret Fausett - acting ALAC Liaison - absent <br>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Michael Palage - ICANN Board
member<br>
<br>
Invited guest<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Jordyn Buchanan - Whois task
force 1/2/3 chair <br>
<br>
<a href="http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council-20050602.mp3%20";>MP3
Recording</a> </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Quorum present at 14:06 CET.<br>
<br>
<b>Bruce Tonkin</b> chaired this teleconference. <br>
<br>
<b>Item 1:</b> Approval of the <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-02jun05.shtml";>Agenda
</a><BR>
<br>
<a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-gnso-02jun05.shtml";>Agenda</a>
approved
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Item 2: Approval of the </b><br>
<b><a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>Minutes of
12 May 2005 </a><br>
Ken Stubbs </b> moved the adoption of the<a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";> minutes of
12 May 2005 </a><br>
Motion approved. One abstention from Maureen Cubberley<br>
Maureen Cubberley asked for clarification on the staff reports that were
mentioned in the <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>minutes of
12 May 2005</a> but were not on the website or the mailing lists. <br>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested that the minutes reflect the action
items and that there be a follow up.<br>
<br>
<b>Decision 1: The <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>minutes of
12 May 2005</a> were adopted<br>
<br>
Item 3:</b> <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00972.html";>Staff
Report</a><BR>
- current areas of work - WHOIS, new gTLDs, transfers, IDNs<BR>
- update on .net agreement and new sponsored agreements<BR>
- update on strategic/operational planning process<BR>
- status on meeting agenda for Luxembourg <br>
- <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00982.html";>GNSO
Council review<br>
</a>To be discussed on Sunday morning 10 June, 2005 at the pre-council meeting
in Luxembourg. <br>
<br>
<strong>Maria Farrell </strong>reported
that :<br>
1.
the Whois combined task force <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00963.html";>final
report on recommendation 1</a> for improving notification and consent for the
use of contact data in the Whois system had been submitted to the GNSO Council
along with a list of possible implementation issues for consideration in
accordance with the policy development process. <br>
2.
the draft terms of reference for the combined Whois task force had been
further redrafted following a discussion at the <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>GNSO Council
Meeting on 12 May 2005 </a>and were to be voted on by the council during the
present meeting.<br>
3. regarding <a
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dow123/docdmsXOg7xVE.doc";>Recommendation
2
</a>, A procedure for conflicts, when there are conflicts between a registrar's
or registry's legal obligations under local privacy laws and their contractual
obligations to ICANN, Steve Metalitz and Kathy Kleiman were working on a
revised draft. <br>
4. at the <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>GNSO Council
meeting on 12 May 2005</a>, Ross Rader volunteered to lead a Transfers policy
implementation group and the staff had prepared some statistics on the most
common problems regarding transfers to be made available to the implementation
group.<br>
<strong>Olof Nordling</strong> reported that drafting had begun on an
inventory of questions and answers necessary to fulfill the implementation
stage of new TLDs and this would be sent to the GNSO council for input. As
background documents, a new <a
href="http://www.wipo.int/edocs/prdocs/en/2005/wipo_pr_2005_409.html";>WIPO</a>
report, requested by Dr. Paul Twomey had been released.<br>
<strong>Kurt Pritz </strong>added that the <a
href="http://www.icann.org/tlds/new-gtld-strategy.pdf";>strategy for the
implementation for new TLDs</a> specified certain issues that were a
prerequisite for building a process. The current work focus has been fleshing
them out and they would be sent to the council for review.<br>
<br>
There was general agreement amongst <strong>Council members </strong>to
encourage a stronger relationship and steady interaction between the ICANN
staff and the Council so that the Council could be engaged in the development
of the documents on 'work in progress' at an early stage to give guidance and
identify policy issues. There was a need for a predictable process on an
ongoing basis that would allow organizations to plan for submitting future
proposals to ICANN.<br>
<br>
<strong>Kurt Pritz</strong> agreed and said that ICANN also felt a sense of
urgency driven by the MoU with the Department of Commerce coming to a close.
The present sTLD round has raised a series of complex issues that needed to be
resolved by economists and technologists before future TLDs were launched. <br>
The list of questions to be sent to Council by June 9, 2005, were regarded as
a 'work in progress document' and creating a procedure for introducing new
TLDs. A matrix would be created into which the input from various organizations
would be filled in.<br>
Council proposed working sessions with ICANN staff and the GNSO Council either
at a physical ICANN meeting or a special teleconference to work through the
questions and answers. <br>
<strong><br>
</strong></font><strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Kurt Pritz
</font></strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">commented that the <a
href="http://www.icann.org/presentations/public-discussion-MdP-06apr05.pdf";>draft
proposal for the annual ICANN strategic and operational planning process</a>
was being reviewed and the <a
href="http://www.icann.org/presentations/public-discussion-MdP-06apr05.pdf";>group</a>
who created the document would be contacted for further discussion.<br>
In Luxembourg the focus would be on approving the Operational Plan/Budget,
and on receiving input for the next iteration of the rolling strategic plan.
<br>
<strong>Council</strong> believed that it was necessary to have a public
forum on the budget in Luxembourg.
</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Lucy Nicholls</strong> and
<strong>Marilyn Cade</strong> asked whether the proposed revisions in the
Registrars Accreditation Agreement, mentioned in the budget process, would be
available for public comment and what was the role of the council in developing
consensus policy to support contractual changes.<br>
<strong><br>
Bruce Tonkin </strong>responded
that one of the issues concerning registrars was that they had joined at
different stages and the agreements were for 5 years. In the existing <a
href="http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm";>Registrars
Accreditation Agreement</a> (RAA) consensus policy had to be complied with at
the time that it was created and there are now inconsistencies between the RAA
and some of the new consensus policies. The RAA needs to be updated to reflect
the changes from the consensus policies. Further changes would need to be
subject to a policy development process (which makes them binding on all
registrars), unless all registrars agreed to the changes. <br>
<strong>Kurt Pritz </strong>commented that most of the changes would be
related to new consensus policies and in rewriting the contracts Council should
be presented with a staff report of issues that need to be addressed.<br>
<br>
- <a href="http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-01jun05.htm";>update on
new sTLDs<br>
</a></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Maria Farrell
</strong>reported that .JOBS and .TRAVEL had been approved by the ICANN Board
and have been designated as registries. On 3 May, at an ICANN Board meeting
additional information was requested on .Asia. ICANN has entered into
commercial and technical negotiations with an additional candidate registry for
.XXX. ICANN has already entered into technical and commercial negotiations with
.CAT, .MOBI and .POST. <br>
<br>
<strong>ACTION ITEM <br>
</strong></font><strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It would be
appropriate for the issues to be numbered in future staff reports according to
the priorities that were determined by the <a
href="http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-06apr05.shtml";>GNSO
council</a>.<br>
</font></strong><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG><BR>
Item 4: Consideration of the final report from the WHOIS task force with
respect to improving notification and consent for the use of contact data in
the Whois system. <BR>
<A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00963.html";>http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00963.html</A><BR>
</STRONG><BR>
<STRONG>Bruce Tonkin</STRONG> referred to his <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00977.html";>posting
to the Council list</A> stating, that with respect to considering the <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00963.html";>final
report </A>from the WHOIS task force on improving notification and consent for
the use of contact data in the Whois system, the GNSO council would follow the
<A href="http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#AnnexA";>ICANN bylaws, section
10, of Annex A</A>, for the Policy Development Process. <BR>
Section 10 states:<BR>
10. Council Deliberation<BR>
</font><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">a. Upon receipt of a Final Report, the
Council chair will<BR>
(i) distribute the Final Report to all Council members; <BR>
The <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00963.html";>Final
report has been distributed</A> to all council members and <BR>
(ii) call for a Council meeting, which has been done on 2 June 2005.<BR>
"The Council may commence its deliberation on the issue prior to the formal
meeting, including via in-person meetings, conference calls, e-mail discussions
or any other means the Council may choose. The deliberation process shall
culminate in a formal Council meeting either in person or via teleconference,
wherein the Council will work towards achieving a Supermajority Vote to present
to the Board."<BR>
<STRONG><BR>
Bruce Tonkin </STRONG>proposed adjourning the vote until the next council
meeting on 23 June 2005 to assure that proxy votes had specific voting
instructions, but using the current debate to determine if Council could reach
a Supermajority vote, 66%, based on the recommendation or whether changes were
needed. <BR>
If the Council could reach a SuperMajority vote on the recommendation, the
Council might decide to create an implementation committee to flesh out some of
the implementation details before providing the Final Report <BR>
to the Board.<BR>
If the Council could not reach a SuperMajority position, then the Council
members that voted against the recommendations needed to provide written
reasons within 5 days for inclusion in the Final Report to the Board why they
voted against the recommendation. <BR>
</FONT><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><BR>
<A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/docEAuV3mXmul.doc";>Text
of the recommendation: </A></FONT></p>
<FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></FONT>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"1. Registrars must ensure that
disclosures regarding availability<BR>
and third-party access to personal data associated with domain names<BR>
actually be presented to registrants during the registration process.<BR>
Linking to an external web page is not sufficient. </FONT></P>
<FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></FONT>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. Registrars must ensure that
these disclosures are set aside from<BR>
other provisions of the registration agreement if they are presented to<BR>
registrants together with that agreement. Alternatively, registrars may<BR>
present data access disclosures separate from the registration<BR>
agreement. The wording of the notice provided by registrars should, to<BR>
the extent feasible, be uniform. <BR>
<BR>
3. Registrars must obtain a separate acknowledgement from<BR>
registrants that they have read and understand these disclosures. This<BR>
provision does not affect registrars' existing obligations to obtain<BR>
registrant consent to the use of their contact information in the WHOIS<BR>
system. "<BR>
<BR>
<STRONG><BR>
Philip Sheppard</STRONG>, representing the Commercial and Business Users
constituency, <STRONG>Niklas Lagergren,</STRONG> a task force member and
representing the Intellectual Property Interests constituency and
<STRONG>Maureen Cubberley</STRONG>, appointed to the Council by the Nominating
Committee all spoke in favour of the recommendation as being clear, concise,
implementable, maintained privacy as well as a high standard of data
protection. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG>Tom Keller</STRONG>, a
task force member and <STRONG>Bruce Tonkin</STRONG>, both representing the
Registrar constituency spoke against the recommendation. <BR>
<STRONG>Tom Keller, </STRONG>against supporting the recommendation, commented
that it placed too much constraint on Registrars, it was unnecessary to single
out one issue especially in view of the<A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/docvXuOBc9Yat.doc";>
list of issues</A> to be clarified, and pointed out that there was a difference
between acknowledgement and consent.<BR>
<STRONG>Bruce Tonkin</STRONG> commented from a registrars view point that the
recommendation dealt with consumer education and moved away from ICANN's core
issues regarding security and stability. There were many elements of registrar
agreements that consumers should be made aware of such as delete, expiration of
names practices, UDRP requirements, registering names in good faith, and rather
than single out one issue, the ICANN organization, the Intellectual Property
and Business Users should be encouraging their communities to read all the
terms and conditions.<BR>
Regarding part one, Registrars support making information about WHOIS
practices available, but disagreed that it was not possible to use a link to a
separate webpage. This is a standard way of linking to privacy policies and
terms and conditions amongst Internet ecommerce websites. <BR>
Obtaining a separate acknowledgement from registrants placed an unnecessary
burden on the registration process. <BR>
The <A
href="http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm#2";>Registrar
Accreditation Agreement</A> had a standard text that registrars should use to
inform registrants 2.7.4 <BR>
<BR>
<STRONG>Ken Stubbs</STRONG>, a task force member and a gTLD registries
constituency representative, proposed a uniform disclosure policy agreed on by
the registrars.<BR>
<BR>
<STRONG>Jordyn Buchanan</STRONG>, the chair of the combined WHOIS task force,
commented that the current recommendation arose from concern the <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/Whois-tf2-preliminary.html";>Whois
task force 2</A> had expressed that in the current notification to registrants
it was neither very conspicuous nor obvious that their data would be published
in a public data base.<BR>
<B><A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/Whois-tf2-preliminary.html#NotificationandConsent";>2.1
Notification and Consent</A></B></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"According to the ICANN Registrar
Accreditation Agreement (RAA), Registrars are required to form an agreement
with Registered Name Holders containing the following elements. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Section 3.7.7 of the RAA addresses
the requirements of the Registrar/Registrant agreement, including the need for
accurate and reliable registrant contact information. To the extent the notice
to registrants of data elements collected and displayed are not clear or may be
overlooked by registrants based on the overall length and complexity of the
registration agreement, it is useful to change the format so that better notice
is delivered to registrants. The task force finds that disclosures regarding
availability and access to Who is data should be set aside from other
provisions of a registration agreement by way of bigger or bolded font, a
highlighted section, simplified language or otherwise made more conspicuous.
</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It follows that separate consent
to the Whois disclosures is also useful. By obtaining separate consent from
registrants, at the time of agreement, to the specific Whois data provisions,
it would further draw attention to and facilitate better understanding of the
registrar’s Whois disclosure policy."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG>In summary:</STRONG><BR>
a. There could be general agreement on: <BR>
2." Registrars must ensure that these disclosures are set aside from other
provisions of the registration agreement if they are presented to registrants
together with that agreement. Alternatively, registrars may<BR>
present data access disclosures separate from the registration agreement. The
wording of the notice provided by registrars should, to the extent feasible, be
uniform. "<BR>
<BR>
b. This recommendation was not supported by registrars: <BR>
3. Registrars must obtain a separate acknowledgement from registrants that they
have read and understand these disclosures. This provision does not affect
registrars' existing obligations to obtain registrant consent to the use of
their contact information in the WHOIS system."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> c. "Linking to an external web
page is not sufficient." was not supported by the Registrars <BR>
<STRONG><BR>
ACTION ITEM:<BR>
Marilyn Cade </STRONG>suggested as an administrative assignment to the ICANN
policy staff:<BR>
<STRONG>Review of the top 10 registrars and a random selection of 10 other
registrars to determine how registrars make registrants aware of their
obligations to provide contact information for public display via the WHOIS
service. <BR>
Report back to Council and the combined Whois task force.<BR>
<BR>
</STRONG></FONT><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG>Timeframe: one week <BR>
Vote adjourned until the next Council meeting June 23 2005, all councillors
unable to attend that meeting should provide proxy votes with instructions. <BR>
</STRONG></FONT><BR>
<FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG>Item 5. Approval of new<A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00968.html";>
terms of reference for combined WHOIS task force</A>, and approval of
membership and voting rules.<BR>
Bruce Tonkin </STRONG>commented that the current <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00968.html";>terms
of reference</A>, version 5, had undergone minor additions since the council
meeting held on <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>May 12,
2005. </A><BR>
<BR>
<STRONG>Niklas Lagergren proposed:<BR>
</STRONG></FONT><STRONG><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">that a requirement be added to the <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00968.html";>draft
terms of reference v5, task 4</A>, to develop a policy for up-front
verification of WHOIS information.<BR>
</FONT></STRONG><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><BR>
Discussion on the motion:<BR>
<STRONG>Marilyn Cade</STRONG> stated that the Commercial and Business Users
constituency supported the need for accurate data, but noted that there are
concerns about the "unfunded mandate" approach, and she did not support adding
in the up front verification processes to the terms of reference for a variety
of reasons. <BR>
<STRONG>Bruce Tonkin</STRONG> suggested investigating the incidence of WHOIS
problem reports, how frequent was their follow up and was the complaint system
working <BR>
<BR>
The motion received <STRONG>12 votes in favour</STRONG>, <STRONG>7 votes
against</STRONG> and <STRONG>6 abstentions</STRONG> (count as votes against)
out of a<STRONG> total of 26 votes</STRONG>. <strong>Kiyoshi Tsuru</strong> no
vote, absent without proxy<BR>
<STRONG>The motion failed.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Tonkin </STRONG>proposed a vote:<BR>
<STRONG>to accept the <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00968.html";>Draft
terms of reference v5</A> for the combined WHOIS task force.
</STRONG></FONT></P>
<FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The motion received <STRONG>22 votes
in favour, </STRONG>out of a total of 26 votes, (4 councillors were absent for
the vote). <BR>
<STRONG>The motion carried</STRONG><BR>
<BR>
<STRONG>Marilyn Cade </STRONG>proposed instructions on the process:<BR>
- The task force should be encouraged to have an interactive relationship with
Council by reporting on a continual basis the stages of work undertaken.<BR>
In order to define the purpose of WHOIS, the current uses should be identified
and data collected by previous task forces with the help of the ICANN policy
staff should be documented. <BR>
<BR>
<STRONG>The GNSO Council accepted the <A
href="http://gnso.icann.org/policies/terms-of-reference.html";>Terms of
Reference for the combined WHOIS task force</A>, noted below: </STRONG><BR>
<BR>
The mission of The Internet Corporation for As</FONT><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">signed Names and Numbers ("ICANN") is to
coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet's systems of unique
identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the
Internet's unique identifier systems. </FONT>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In performing this
mission, ICANN's bylaws set out 11 core values to guide its decisions and
actions. Any ICANN body making a recommendation or decision shall exercise its
judgment to determine which of these core values are most relevant and how they
apply to the specific circumstances of the case at hand, and to determine, if
necessary, an appropriate and defensible balance among competing
values.</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ICANN has agreements
with gTLD registrars and gTLD registries that require the provision of a WHOIS
service via three mechanisms: port-43, web based access, and bulk access. The
agreements also require a<BR>
Registered Name Holder to provide to a Registrar accurate and reliable
contact details and promptly correct and update them during the term of the
Registered Name registration, including: the full name, postal<BR>
address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and fax number if available
of the Registered Name Holder; name of authorized person for contact purposes
in the case of an Registered Name Holder that is an<BR>
organization, association, or corporation; the name, postal address, e-mail
address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax number of the
technical contact for the Registered Name; and the name, postal<BR>
address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax
number of the administrative contact for the Registered Name. The contact
information must be adequate to facilitate timely resolution of<BR>
any problems that arise in connection with the Registered Name.</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A registrar is
required in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) to take reasonable
precautions to protect Personal Data from loss, misuse, unauthorized access or
disclosure, alteration, or destruction.</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The goal of the
WHOIS task force is to improve the effectiveness of the WHOIS service in
maintaining the stability and security of the Internet's unique identifier
systems, whilst taking into account where<BR>
appropriate the need to ensure privacy protection for the Personal Data of
natural persons that may be Registered Name Holders, the authorised
representative for contact purposes of a Register Name Holder, or the
administrative or technical contact for a domain name.</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT
face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG>Tasks:</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1) Define the
purpose of the WHOIS service in the context of ICANN's mission and relevant
core values, international and national laws protecting privacy of natural
persons, international and national laws<BR>
that relate specifically to the WHOIS service, and the changing nature of
Registered Name Holders.<BR>
</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2) Define the
purpose of the Registered Name Holder, technical, and administrative contacts,
in the context of the purpose of WHOIS, and the purpose for which the data was
collected. Use the relevant definitions from <A
href="http://www.icann.org/gnso/transfers-tf/report-exhc-12feb03.htm";>Exhibit C
of the Transfers Task force report </A>as a starting point <BR>
(from
http://www.icann.org/gnso/transfers-tf/report-exhc-12feb03.htm):</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Contact: Contacts are
individuals or entities associated with domain<BR>
name records. Typically, third parties with specific inquiries or<BR>
concerns will use contact records to determine who should act upon<BR>
specific issues related to a domain name record. There are typically<BR>
three of these contact types associated with a domain name record, the<BR>
Administrative contact, the Billing contact and the Technical
contact.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Contact,
Administrative: The administrative contact is an individual,<BR>
role or organization authorized to interact with the Registry or<BR>
Registrar on behalf of the Domain Holder. The administrative contact<BR>
should be able to answer non-technical questions about the domain name's<BR>
registration and the Domain Holder. In all cases, the Administrative<BR>
Contact is viewed as the authoritative point of contact for the domain<BR>
name, second only to the Domain Holder.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Contact, Billing: The
billing contact is the individual, role or<BR>
organization designated to receive the invoice for domain name<BR>
registration and re-registration fees.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Contact, Technical: The
technical contact is the individual, role or<BR>
organization that is responsible for the technical operations of the<BR>
delegated zone. This contact likely maintains the domain name server(s)<BR>
for the domain. The technical contact should be able to answer technical<BR>
questions about the domain name, the delegated zone and work with<BR>
technically oriented people in other zones to solve technical problems<BR>
that affect the domain name and/or zone.<BR>
Domain Holder: The individual or organization that registers a specific<BR>
domain name. This individual or organization holds the right to use that<BR>
specific domain name for a specified period of time, provided certain<BR>
conditions are met and the registration fees are paid. This person or<BR>
organization is the "legal entity" bound by the terms of the relevant<BR>
service agreement with the Registry operator for the TLD in question."<BR>
</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3) Determine what
data collected should be available for public access in the context of the
purpose of WHOIS. Determine how to access data that is not available for public
access. The current elements that must be displayed by a registrar
are:</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The name of the
Registered Name;</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The names of the
primary nameserver and secondary nameserver(s) for the Registered
Name;</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The identity of
Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's website);</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The original
creation date of the registration;</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The expiration
date of the registration;</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The name and
postal address of the Registered Name Holder;</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The name, postal
address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax
number of the technical contact for the Registered Name; and</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">- The name, postal
address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax
number of the administrative contact for the Registered Name.</FONT></P>
<P align=justify><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(4) Determine how to
improve the process for notifying a registrar of inaccurate WHOIS data, and the
process for investigating and correcting inaccurate data. Currently a registrar
"shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact
information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take
reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar
learns of<BR>
inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors,
it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy."<br>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(5) Determine how to resolve
differences between a Registered Name Holder's, gTLD Registrar's, or gTLD
Registry's obligation to abide by all applicable laws and governmental
regulations that relate to the<BR>
WHOIS service, as well as the obligation to abide by the terms of the
agreements with ICANN that relate to the WHOIS service. [Note this task refers
to the current work in the WHOIS task force called 'Recommendation 2', A
Procedure for conflicts, when there are conflicts between a registrar's of
registry's legal obligations under local privacy laws and their contractual
obligations to ICANN.]<BR>
</FONT></P>
<p><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 6: <A
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/reg-com/msg00032.html";>Process
for use by ICANN in considering requests for consent and related contractual
amendments to allow changes in the architecture operation of a gTLD
registry</A>. </strong><BR>
Bruce Tonkin reported that as agreed at the <a
href="http://www.gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-12may05.htm";>last
meeting, 12 May 2005</a>, <a
href="http://gnso.icann.org/policies/initial-rpt-registry-approval-31may05.htm";>the
report </a>has been posted for a 20 day public comment period.<br>
The constituencies were urged to <a href="registry-services@xxxxxxxxx">submit
comments</a> to the process.<br>
The following step would be a Final report drafted by staff incorporating the
public comments, published 7 days before the Luxembourg meeting, aiming to
vote on the report at the meeting.</FONT></p>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 7: Transfer policy
staff report </strong><BR>
see update under item 3.<br>
<BR>
<strong>Item 8: new gTLDs</strong><BR>
To be deferred to the next meeting on 23 June 2005.<br>
<BR>
<strong>Item 9: Internationalised Domain Names (IDN) <br>
</strong><BR>
<strong>Cary Karp</strong> commented that <a
href="http://ifap.ru/wsis/";>UNESCO</a> had issued two <a
href="%20%20http://www.unesco.org/wsis/meetings/multilingualism";>WSIS
preparatory symposia </a>addressing issues clearly related to IDNs and that a
key element in the responsible introduction of IDNs were the ICANN guidelines
which were in need of revision.<BR>
<strong>Bruce Tonkin</strong> suggested forming a technical committee to look
at the ICANN guidelines on IDNs and submit a report to council and to ask the
ICANN staff<br>
-
to advise the council on the level of discussion from the ICANN Board on IDNs
<br>
- to
contact Cary Karp regarding other fora that were working on IDNs </FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Item 9: Comments on
2005/2006 budget operational plan<br>
</strong>see update under item 3.<strong> <BR>
</strong><BR>
<strong>Item 10: Any other business</strong></FONT><br>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Suzanne Sene,</strong> the
Government Advisory Committee liaison to the GNSO Council, informed the council
of an invitational working session, intended for all GAC members, with
invitation to the Councils of the relevant ICANN Supporting Organizations,
relevant ICANN staff and invited guest speakers/participants. The aim was to
<br>
broaden understanding of the diverse aspects of domain name and IP address data
maintained by registries and registrars, the public display of this data via
WHOIS services, and the impact of the data on combating illegal activities on
the Internet. The session would not be open to other attendance and was planned
for Sunday 10 July, 2005 from 14:00 to 18:00. <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bruce Tonkin</b>
<b>declared
the GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for participating.<br>
The meeting ended: 16: 28 CET. </b></font></P>
<ul>
<li>
<p><font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Next GNSO Council
</b><strong>Teleconference</strong></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif"> <strong>June 23 2005</strong> <strong>at 12:00 UTC.</strong> <br>
see: <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/";>Calendar</a></font><br>
</li>
</ul>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<p> </p>
<!--#include virtual="/footer.shtml"--> </font>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|