<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] Absentee voting 25 September 2008
- To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] Absentee voting 25 September 2008
- From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:34:37 -0700
- Accept-language: fr-FR, en-US
- Acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AckfNHlQbOklxNnwRPifdaDVzLBR4QACKoNQ
- Thread-topic: Absentee voting 25 September 2008
Dear Councilors,
In keeping with the absentee voting procedures, all councilors who were absent
from the meeting today, Thursday 25 September, are invited to send the GNSO
secretariat <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a request for a ballot.
Councilors noted as absent: Avri Doria, Jon Bing, Tony Holmes, Tony Harris, Ute
Decker, Cyril Chua, Carlos Souza, Adrian Kinderis, Tom Keller, Edmon Chung,
Jordi Iparraguirre.
(Norbert Klein was disconnected from the call due to connectivity issues.)
(Jordi Iparraguirre, Adrian Kinderis had dropped off the call at the time of
the vote)
You will then be sent a ballot with an option to vote, YES, NO or ABSTAIN.
The current bylaws require a reason for abstaining on a policy recommendation,
so please indicate your reason for abstaining.
This process should be completed within 72 hours of the meeting which ended at
14:09 UTC on Thursday 25 September 2008.
Completed ballots are due NLT 14:O9 UTC, Sunday, 28 September 2008
(10:09 EDT, 11:09 Rio de Janeiro, 15:09 London, 16:09 Germany, 21:09 Phnom
Penh, 22:09 HongKong, 00:09 Melbourne Monday 29 September 2008)
Motion proposing an Issues Report on aspects of Registry-Registrar Agreements
Motion proposed by Mike Rodenbaugh, seconded by Greg Ruth with friendly
amendments from Tim Ruiz and Chuck Gomes.
Whereas:
1. ICANN's mission is to ensure the security and stability of the DNS, and to
develop policy reasonably related to that mission.
2. Various forms of DNS abuse, in isolation and/or in the aggregate, cause a
less secure and stable DNS.
3. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements and appended registry-registrar
agreements contain a provision such as Section 3.6.5 of the.info Registry
Agreement, Appendix 8 : 3.6.5. (Registrars) acknowledge and agree that Afilias
reserves the right to deny, cancel or transfer any registration or transaction,
or place any domain name(s) on registry lock, hold or similar status, that it
deems necessary, in its discretion; (1) to protect the integrity and stability
of the registry; (2) to comply with any applicable laws, government rules or
requirements, requests of law enforcement, or any dispute resolution process;
(3) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on the part of Afilias, as well
as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, and employees; (4) per
the terms of the registration agreement or (5) to correct mistakes made by
Afilias or any Registrar in connection with a domain name registration. Afilias
also reserves the right to place upon registry lock, hold or similar status a
domain name during resolution of a dispute.
4. Afilias, the dotInfo Registry Operator, per its recent RSTEP request, has
sought to clarify and implement its specific abusive registration policy with
respect to this provision. This request has been approved by ICANN.
5. Some of ICANN's gTLD registry agreements, notably the Verisign contracts for
.com and .net, have no such provision. Other gTLD registry agreements do
contain such provision, but the registry operators have not developed or have
inconsistently developed abusive registration policies.
The GNSO Council resolves to request an Issues Report from ICANN Staff within
30 days with respect to the following:
1. To identify and describe the various provisions in existing and previous
gTLD registry and registry-registrar agreements which relate to contracting
parties' ability to take action in response to abuse.
2. To identify and describe various provisions in a representative sampling of
gTLD registration agreements which relate to contracting parties' and/or
registrants rights and obligations with respect to abuse.
3. To identify and describe any previous discussion in ICANN fora which
substantively pertains to provisions of this nature in any of these agreements.
4. To request an opinion of ICANN Staff as to which aspects of registration
abuse policies as discussed above may be within the scope of GNSO policy
development.
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|