[council] PDP Feb 06: Report for Council

[Liz Williams <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Colleagues
> "The Policies for Contractual Conditions:  Existing Registries  
> (PDPFeb06) policy development process is now completed at the Task  
> Force level.  The Task Force have voted on the Final Report which  
> will be posted on the GNSO's website at http://gnso.icann.org/ as  
> soon as possible.  The GNSO Secretariat will send out the correct  
> link and notification as the report is too large to be sent through  
> the email server.
> The Task Force voted that... "The final draft of Policies for  
> Contractual Conditions:  Existing Registries (PDPFeb06) dated 20  
> April 2007 and available at: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-pdp- 
> feb06-tfr-10apr07.pdf
> accurately reflects the work of the TF and accurately reflects the  
> discussions held during the meeting, the comments received on the  
> previous drafts, and the recommendations made and discussed in the  
> Task Force."
> Of the 19 total votes which could have been cast 6 affirmative  
> votes were received; 8 votes were not cast including the Registry  
> Constituency which sent, on 26 April 2007, the note below.
> The NCUC, the IPC and two registrar representatives did not meet  
> the poll cut-off time.  There were 2 abstentions.  The Chair of the  
> Registry Constituency sent the following response to the vote.
> "To the Secretariat:
> The Registry Constituency and its members who are participants in  
> PDPFEB06 do not register a vote and object to the call for a vote  
> made in the Secretariat's message of 20 April 2007 on the following  
> grounds:
> 1. There is no basis in GNSO or PDP procedures for a vote on a  
> Final Report.
> 2. There is no basis in GNSO or PDP procedures for a vote on the
> "accuracy" of a Final Report.
> 3. There is no basis in GNSO or PDP procedures for a vote by
> "individuals who are members of the TF."
> 4. The Final Report is meaningless because it is not properly  
> authorized
> by GNSO or PDP procedures and is outside the scope of GNSO powers."
>
> Alistair Dixon of the Business Constituency made one amendment to  
> the Report which said "Recommendation 2A should be amended to show  
> it has "medium support", consistent with the criteria for level of  
> support in paragraph 1.3."
This item will be placed on the GNSO Council's May 2007 agenda.

We are now at Stage 10 of the GNSO's policy development process --  
refer to http://www.icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/ 
bylaws-28feb06.htm#AnnexA for further information.
Kind regards.


Liz
.....................................................

Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob