<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
AW: [council] Contingent RAA Motion
Thanks as well Kristina
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
________________________________
Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Im Auftrag von Rosette, Kristina
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 16:09
An: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: RE: [council] Contingent RAA Motion
Wolf,
Yes, technically. As a practical matter, though, I suppose whether an
amendment is an improvement depends on the amendment and your perspective on it.
K
________________________________
From: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 5:11 AM
To: Rosette, Kristina; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: [council] Contingent RAA Motion
Kristina and Mary,
just for my understanding since I haven't been deeply involved
in the matter: "improvements" or "amendments" to the RAA means the same item?
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
________________________________
Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Rosette, Kristina
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. März 2011 03:38
An: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Betreff: [council] Contingent RAA Motion
All,
I would like to propose an RAA motion that recommends
that Staff adopt an amended version of the process specified as Process B in
the Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation
Agreement. Process B was proposed by the Registrar Stakeholder Group members
of the Drafting Team. I am hopeful that the amended process ("Process B+") is
an acceptable compromise. As you will see from the final Whereas clause, this
motion is contingent on the failure of the motion Mary has just introduced (and
that I have seconded), and will be voted upon only if that motion fails.
Safe travels to San Francisco.
K
-*-
Motion to Approve an Amended Recommendation in the
Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation
Agreement.
Whereas, on 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council approved the
form of the 2009 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) developed as a result
of a lengthy consultative process initiated by ICANN;
Whereas, in addition to approving the 2009 RAA, on 4
March 2009 the GNSO Council convened a joint drafting team with members of the
At-Large Community, to conduct further work related to improvements to the RAA;
specifically to: (a) draft a charter identifying registrant rights and
responsibilities; and (b) develop a specific process to identify additional
potential amendments to the RAA on which further action may be desirable;
Whereas, on 18 October 2010, the Joint GNSO/ALAC RAA
Drafting Team published its Final Report describing specific recommendations
and proposals to the GNSO Council for improvements to the RAA;
Whereas, the GNSO Council has reviewed the Final Report
and, in its resolution 20110113-2, the GNSO Council approved of the Form of
Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Charter as described in Annex D of the
Final Report and recommended that Staff commence the consultation process with
Registrars in the RAA to finalize the Registrant Rights and Responsibilities
Charter for posting on the websites of Registrars as specified in Section 3.15
of the RAA;
Whereas, a GNSO Council motion recommending that Staff
adopt the process specified as Process A in the Final Report to develop a new
form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described in
the Final Report did not pass;
Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to approve an amended
version of the process specified as Process B in the Final Report to develop a
new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium Priority topics described
in the Final Report.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council recommends that Staff
adopt an amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final
Report to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium
Priority topics described in the Final Report. As amended herein, Process B
entails:
1. The prioritized list of topics as set forth in the
Final Report is sent to the GNSO Council and ICANN Staff for identification of
any topics that would require consensus policy development rather than RAA
contract amendment. This step shall be completed not later than sixty (60)
days after the date of this resolution.
2. ICANN Staff will schedule a public consultation, to
be held at the first ICANN public meeting that occurs after completion of the
review in Step 1, to provide members of the ICANN community with the
opportunity to articulate their support of and/or objection to the High and
Medium Priority topics described in the Final Report.
3. Within thirty (30) days after the public
consultation described in Step 2, negotiations begin with the Negotiating Group
consisting of ICANN Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group (as a whole).
4. The Negotiating Group shall provide, for public
comment, written reports monthly on the status and progress of the
negotiations. Such reports shall include proposed text under consideration and
identify items and text agreed upon by the Negotiating Group. The monthly
report shall identify (a) topics identified in the Final Report as High or
Medium Priority and that were not determined in Step 1 as requiring consensus
policy development; and (b) proposed amendments put forth by any Stakeholder
Group, Constituency, and/or Advisory Committee (collectively, the "Rejected
Topics and Amendments"), if any, that have been rejected by the Negotiating
Group.
5. The Negotiating Group reviews public comments
received and continues negotiations as necessary. Steps 4 and 5 shall repeat as
necessary; provided, however, that the full final draft of the new RAA must be
posted for public comment not later than September 17, 2012.
6. Subject to the date requirement in Step 5, ICANN
Staff and the Registrar Stakeholder Group shall determine when the full final
draft of the new RAA is ready to be posted for public comment. The full final
draft of the new RAA that is posted for public comment shall be accompanied by
a detailed written explanation, approved by both Staff and the Registrar
Stakeholder Group, that sets forth the basis for the rejection of all Rejected
Topics and Amendments.
7. The GNSO Council shall review the full final draft
of the new RAA, consider public comments, and vote on approval of the draft new
RAA. A Supermajority vote of the GNSO Council is required to approve the new
RAA.
8. If the GNSO Council approves the new RAA, the new
RAA goes to Board for approval.
9. If the GNSO Council does not approve the new RAA,
the new RAA is sent back to the Negotiating Group with appropriate feedback for
reconsideration. Repeat from step 7.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that
this process be initiated by ICANN immediately.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|