[council] GNSO Council Resolutions 8 September 2010

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Councillors,

Ahead of the official Council minutes, the following four resolutions were 
passed at the Council meeting on 8 September 2010.

Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen





1.    Amendment to the  MOTION TO ENDORSE VOLUNTEERS TO SERVE ON THE AOC REVIEW 
TEAMS by Kristina Rosette



In the light of the fact that it sounds as if numerous constituencies and 
stakeholder groups may not have had the opportunity to fully discuss adding 
George Asare Sakyi, I move that his name be deleted from the list of candidates 
put forth to the selectors for the SSR review Team

     1a.  MOTION TO ENDORSE VOLUNTEERS TO SERVE ON THE AOC REVIEW TEAMS as 
amended

WHEREAS, in furtherance of ICANN's responsibilities under the Affirmation of 
Commitments, applicants are being sought to volunteer to serve on the review 
teams for Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS and Whois Policy;

WHEREAS, these AOC review teams will include members endorsed by the GNSO 
Council;

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council desires to endorse applicants to serve on the review 
teams for Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS (SSR) and Whois Policy;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:

RESOLVED, that pursuant to the approved Endorsement Process, the following 
applicants are hereby endorsed by the GNSO Council to serve on the AOC review 
teams listed below:

SSR Review Team:
Jeff Brueggeman
David Cake
Rick Wilhelm
Ken Silva

WHOIS Policy:
Susan Kawaguchi
Kim G. Von Arx
James Bladel
Kathy Kleiman

RESOLVED FURTHER, the GNSO Secretariat is requested to forward, as appropriate, 
the names of the endorsed applicants to serve on the "WHOIS Policy" and 
"Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS" review teams to the RT 
Selectors.

The motion carried in both the Contracted parties house and in the Non 
Contracted parties house.

1.    GNSO Council motion to pursue study of Whois Misuse.

Whereas:

In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and objective 
understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois system would 
benefit future GNSO policy development efforts 
(http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/).

Before defining the details of these studies, the Council solicited suggestions 
from the community for specific topics of study on WHOIS. Suggestions were 
submitted
(http://forum.icann.org/lists/WHOIS-comments-2008/) and ICANN staff prepared a 
'Report on Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS', dated 25-Feb-2008
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/Whois-privacy/Whois-study-suggestion-report-25feb08.pdf).

On 28-Mar-2008 the GNSO Council resolved to form a WHOIS Study Working Group to 
develop a proposed list, if any, of recommended studies for which ICANN staff 
would be asked to provide cost estimates to the Council
(http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-27mar08.shtml).

The WHOIS Study WG did not reach consensus regarding further studies, and on 
25-Jun-2008 the GNSO Council resolved to form another group of volunteers 
(WHOIS Hypotheses WG) to review the 'Report on Public Suggestions on Further 
Studies of WHOIS' and the GAC letter on WHOIS studies. 
(http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf).

This WG was tasked to prepare a list of hypotheses to be tested, and reported 
to the Council on 26-Aug-2008.
(https://st.icann.org/Whois-hypoth-wg/index.cgi?Whois_hypotheses_wg#Whois_study_hypotheses_wg_final_report
 ).

On 5-Nov-2008, the Council convened a volunteer group of Councilors and 
interested constituency members to draft a resolution regarding studies, if 
any, for which cost estimates should be obtained. The Whois Study Drafting Team 
further consolidated studies and data requested by the GAC 
(http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf ).

For each of the consolidated studies, constituencies were invited to assign 
priority rank and assess feasibility. 5 constituencies provided the requested 
rankings, while 2 constituencies (NCUC and Registrars) indicated that no 
further studies were justified. The GAC was also invited to assign priorities, 
but no reply was received. The Drafting Team determined that the six studies 
with the highest average priority scores should be the subject of further 
research to determine feasibility and obtain cost estimates.

On 04-Mar-2009, Council requested Staff to conduct research on feasibility and 
cost estimates for selected Whois studies and report its findings to Council.
(See Motion 3 at 04 mar 2009 motions).

On 23-Mar-2010, Staff presented its latest report on feasibility and cost 
estimates for Whois Studies.
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf)
This report included a Staff Analysis and Recommendations for the first study, 
regarding WHOIS Misuse. The WHOIS Misuse study addressed 3 originally requested 
studies (1, 14, and 21) and GAC data set 2. Public access to WHOIS data leads 
to a measurable degree of misuse - that is, to actions that cause actual harm, 
are illegal or illegitimate, or otherwise contrary to the stated legitimate 
purpose.

At ICANN's meeting in Brussels, representatives of the GAC reiterated their 
interest in ICANN's response to the GAC letter of Apr-2008, which included 
these requests for further studies of WHOIS 
(http://www.icann.org/correspondence/karlins-to-thrush-16apr08.pdf), stating:

First and foremost, the GAC believes that studies of WHOIS gTLD data should be 
undertaken by neutral third parties and should create a factual record that 
documents the uses and abuses of WHOIS data recognized by the GAC WHOIS 
Principles. The goal should be to initially compile data that provides a 
documented evidence base regarding:

* the amount and source of traffic accessing WHOIS servers and the types and 
numbers of different groups of users and what those users are using WHOIS data 
for; and

* the types and extent of misuses of WHOIS data and what harm is caused by each 
type of misuse, including economic, use of WHOIS data in SPAM generation, abuse 
of personal data, loss of reputation or identity theft, security costs and loss 
of data."

The Affirmation of Commitments requires that ICANN conduct reviews of WHOIS 
policy and implementation "to assess the extent to which WHOIS policy is 
effective and its implementation meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement 
and promotes consumer trust." The first such review must be organized by 
30-Sep-2010. 
(http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm)

The proposed budget for FY 2011 includes at least $400,000 for WHOIS studies.

Resolved:

Council requests ICANN staff to proceed with the WHOIS Misuse Study, as 
described in Staff's 23-Mar-2010 Report, using the vendor selection process 
described in Annex of that same report. ( 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar10-en.pdf).

Amendment on behalf of the Registries Stakeholder Group

Further resolved that ICANN staff is requested to ensure the study reaches out 
to a global set of consumer and data protection, regulatory and law enforcement 
organizations, including the range of government organizations who would have 
reason to compile and keep records of Whois misuse,

Further resolved that ICANN staff be required to protect the confidentiality 
and privacy of Registrant Whois data collected for this study, according to 
best practices including encryption, and Registrants and all groups contacted 
be informed of this protection.

Further resolved that ICANN staff be required to include in the study analysis 
all individual elements in the Whois data which descriptive study surveyed 
sources identify as having been misused; data elements identified by these 
surveyed sources will not be discarded or otherwise eliminated  on the grounds 
that the actual data source is unclear or that online search verification 
discloses multiple possible sources of the data.
Further resolved that ICANN staff will extend the time of the Experimental 
Study from 90 days to a minimum of 6 months to better track the results of the 
data harvesting.

The motion carried in both the Contracted Parties House and in the Non 
Contracted Parties House.



2.    Motion to Forward the Revised Initial Report on the Vertical Integration 
PDP to the ICANN Board.

Whereas, on 28 January 2010, the GNSO Council approved a policy development 
process (PDP) on the topic of vertical integration between registries and 
registrars;

Whereas the VI Working Group has produced its Revised Initial Report and has 
presented it to the GNSO Council on 18 August; and,

Whereas, the GNSO Council recognizes that the Revised Initial Report does not 
include any recommendations that have achieved a consensus within the VI 
Working Group, and instead reflects the current state of the work of the VI 
Working Group;

Whereas, the GNSO Council has reviewed the Revised Initial Report, and desires 
to forward the Revised Initial Report to the ICANN Board;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:

RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council appreciates the hard work and tremendous effort 
shown by each member of the VI PDP working group in developing the Revised 
Initial Report on an expedited basis;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Council hereby agrees to forward the Revised Initial 
Report to the ICANN Board as a snapshot of the current state of the ongoing 
deliberations of the VI Working Group with the understanding that the VI 
Working Group will continue to work through these issues to attempt to produce 
consensus recommendations in a final report.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that this resolution is not an endorsement or approval by the 
GNSO Council of the contents of the Revised Initial Report at this time;
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council directs Staff to make the appropriate 
notifications to the ICANN Secretary and to the community.

The motion carried in both the Contracted Parties House and in the Non 
Contracted Parties House.

           4.      Motion To Support A Cross Community Working Group On New 
gTLD Recommendation 6

WHEREAS, ICANN aims to ensure that the New gTLD Program contains appropriate 
safeguards to address culturally objectionable and/or sensitive strings, while 
protecting internationally recognized freedom of expression rights;

*WHEREAS, numerous stakeholders have expressed concerns about the proposed 
implementation of the GNSO Council's Recommendation 6 regarding procedures for 
addressing culturally objectionable and/or sensitive strings;

NCSG amended clause:

WHEREAS, *various stakeholders have expressed concerns about the proposed 
implementation of the GNSO Council's Recommendation 6 regarding strings that 
contravene generally-accepted legal norms relating to morality and public order 
that are recognized under international principles of law;

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council desires to participate in a joint working group with 
other interested Supporting Organizations (SO's) and Advisory Committee (AC's) 
to provide guidance to the ICANN new gTLD Implementation Team and the ICANN 
Board with regard to the implementation of recommendation 6;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:

RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council supports the formation of a cross-community 
working group to provide guidance to the ICANN new gTLD Implementation Team and 
the ICANN Board with regard to the implementation of recommendation 6;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that Stéphane Van Gelder shall serve as the GNSO Council 
Liaison for this cross-community working group until 13 September 2010;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council approves the Terms of Reference to 
guide the activities of this cross-community working group;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that ICANN Staff shall identify and assign applicable Staff 
support for this working group and arrange for support tools such as a mailing 
list, website and other tools as needed.
The motion carried in both the Contracted Parties House and in the Non 
Contracted Parties House.







Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://gnso.icann.org