[council] RE: Motion to Approve Amended Version of Process B in Final Report on Proposals for Improvements to RAA with regard to High and Medium Priority Topics described in the Final Report

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Kristina,

Is this the same or different than the motion presented to the Council a few 
months back that was not approved?  If this is different, can you please 
provide a redline of the changes and explain the differences so we can get our 
stakeholder group feedback.

Thanks.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy


________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 1:14 PM
To: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [council] Motion to Approve Amended Version of Process B in Final 
Report on Proposals for Improvements to RAA with regard to High and Medium 
Priority Topics described in the Final Report

All,

I hereby submit for action at our October 6 meeting a motion to approve an 
amended version of the process specified as Process B in the Final Report on 
Proposals for Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement ("Final 
Report") to develop a new form of RAA with respect to the High and Medium 
Priority topics described in the Final Report.  For convenience, I attach the 
motion in document form and provide a redline against a previous version of 
this motion that did not pass in our April 7 meeting.

-*-

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, a previous GNSO Council motion 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 did not pass at the GNSO Council's April 7, 2011 meeting;
Whereas, the GNSO Council desires to approve a further 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 GNSO Council requests that the ICANN Office of the General Counsel 
review the prioritized list of topics as set forth in the Final Report and 
identify any topics that would require consensus policy development rather than 
RAA contract amendment. The GNSO Council requests that the Office of the 
General Counsel complete and publish on the ICANN website the outcome of such 
review and identification not later than seventy-five (75) 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 sixty (60) 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, bimonthly written 
reports 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. Each bimonthly report shall identify the status 
of (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; and shall identify such topics, if any, that have 
been rejected by the Negotiating Group (collectively, the "Rejected Topics and 
Amendments").
5. The Negotiating Group shall review public comments received and continue 
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 March 4, 2013.
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.
-*-

Sincerely yours,
Kristina

Kristina Rosette
Covington & Burling LLP
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC  20004-2401
voice:  202-662-5173
direct fax:  202-778-5173
main fax:  202-662-6291
e-mail:  krosette@xxxxxxx
www.cov.com/krosette

This message is from a law firm and may contain information that is 
confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, 
please immediately advise the sender by reply e-mail that this message has been 
inadvertently transmitted to you and delete this e-mail from your system.  
Thank you for your cooperation.