RE: [council] Draft motions on Registration Abuse Policy

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> The GNSO Council members will consult with their constituencies 
> in preparation for a vote on a PDP and other possible motions at 
> the Council meeting on 8 January.

Thank you Avri. The problem with motions like the ones flying around
here in the last day and a half (less than 7 days before our meeting) is
the Council is not like the Board (no matter what some like to claim).
The Councilors represent their constituents and need time to consult
with them on various issues and decisions before voting. Even seven days
is really cutting it short. 

Hopefully the PPSC PDP Team will take this into account and require -
without exception - a reasonable notice period for motions that allows
for constituency consultation. Once Councilors have a good handle on the
views of their constituents regarding a particular motion, they will be
in a much better position to *negotiate* necessary amendments that
address the needs/concerms of their constituents and can vote in a more
informed manner.

Tim 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] Draft motions on Registration Abuse Policy
From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, December 12, 2008 10:55 am
To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Hi,

In response to an action item from the last meeting, I have submitted 
3 possible motions in response to the Issues Report on Registration 
Abuse. Some of the details still need to be filled out, but I wanted 
to get these to the council as soon as possible. They are on the wiki.

They are conceived of as a sequence:

1 We set up a team to create a WG charter to deal with the open issues 
as recommended in the Issues Report

2. we vote on a PDP as required by the bylaws

3. if we do not approve the PDP at this time, we resolve to vote again 
on the PDP once the work has been completed by the WG.

thanks

a.


-------

Motions on Registration Abuse Policy (to be completed)

1. WG motion

Made By: Avri Doria
Seconded:

Whereas:

The Issues Report on GNSO Issues Report on Registration Abuse Policies 
indicated that further review, evaluation and study be done before a 
PDP is initiated,

Resolved:

That a drafting team be formed to create a proposed charter for a 
working group to investigate the open issues documented in the issues 
report on Registrations Abuse Policy. Specifically:

9.1 Review and Evaluate Findings
A first step would be for the GNSO Council to review and 
evaluate the findings,
taking into account that this report provides an overview of 
registration abuse
provisions, but does not analyse how these provisions are 
implemented in practice
and whether they are deemed effective in addressing 
registration abuse.
9.2 Identify specific policy issues
Following the review and evaluation of the findings, the GNSO 
Council would need to determine whether there are specific policy 
issues regarding registration abuse. As part of this determination it 
would be helpful to define the specific type(s) of abuse of concern, 
especially distinguishing between registration abuse and other types 
of abuse if relevant.
9.3 Need for further research
As part of the previous two steps, ICANN Staff would recommend 
that the GNSO Council determines where further research may be needed 
– e.g. is lack of uniformity a substantial problem, how effective are 
current registration abuse provisions in addressing abuse in practice, 
is an initial review or analysis of the UDRP required?


The WG charter should be ready for review by the council on or before 
15 January 2009 and will be voted on at the council meeting of 29 
January 2009.

2. PDP motion

Made By: Avri Doria
Seconded:

Whereas: An Issues Report on GNSO Issues Report on Registration Abuse 
Policies has been produced and the by-laws (insert section #) require 
a vote on the formation of a Policy Development Process,

Resolved:

That a PDP on Registration Abuse Policy be initiated.

3. Contingent Motion

Made By: Avri Doria
Seconded:

Whereas: The motion to initiate a PDP at this time failed and a 
Working group has been formed to further investigate the issue 
presented in the Issues report

Resolved: The GNSO Council will reconsider initiating a PDP on 
Registration Abuse Policy once the Working has produced its report and 
it has been subject to constituency and public review.
Motions on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery

Whereas:

An Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery has been 
produced and introduced to the GNSO Council.

Resolve:

The GNSO Council members will consult with their constituencies in 
preparation for a vote on a PDP and other possible motions at the 
Council meeting on 8 January.