RE: [council] Motion from the RrSG - Clarification

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

After receiving requests from both Heather Dryden and Suzanne Radell I
would like to be sure that the comment I made below, when originally
introducing this motion, is clearly understood.

First, the recommendations I refer to in my comment are numbered bullets
1, 2, and 3 (but the RrSG would still like to explore the viability of
numbered bullet 4. Numbered bullet 5 was removed in the later amended
motion).

Second, while I stand by my comment that we, the RrSG, feel those
recommendations are generally agreed as necessary by LEAs and supported
by the GAC, I want to be sure it is understood that we have not had the
motion reviewed nor approved by either LEAs or the GAC. The basis for
that comment are the following:

1. Law Enforcement Recommended RAA Amendments and ICANN Due Dilligence -
Detailed Version
as included in the Final Drafting Team Report on Improvements to the RAA
beginning on page 133:
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18oct10-en.pdf

2. GAC Communique Nairobi 10 March 2010 (section VI) and Janis Karklins,
GAC Chariman, letter to Peter Dengate Thrush, 12 April 2010 as included
in the Final Drafting Team Report on Improvements to the RAA beginning
on pages 141 and 140 respectively. Note that in both it states the GAC
expects the LEA proposals will be "thoroughly examined and taken into
consideration."

3. Discussions that have taken place between LEAs and registrars, and
discussions that have taken place between the GAC and registrars.

Again, the motion and the idea of establishing these recommendations as
consensus policy through a PDP (and then immediately enforceable on all
registrars) was our idea alone.

Thanks,
Tim  
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] Motion from the RrSG
From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, September 13, 2011 1:51 pm
To: "GNSO Council" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

The following motion (also attached as a doc file) is being made at the
request of the RrSG. We feel the recommendations contained in it are
requested and generally agreed as necessary by Law Enforcement Agencies
(LEA), are supported by the GAC, and have not garnered any opposition
from other SGs or Cs.

Tim

--------------

WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has consulted extensively with
representatives of international law enforcement agencies regarding the
nature of Internet-based criminal activity and the information and tools
available to help address crime that involves the domain name system;
and

WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has reviewed law enforcement
proposals and requests regarding registrar cooperation in addressing
online crime; and

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council is prepared to assist law enforcement in its
long-term effort to address Internet-based criminal activity;

NOW THEREFORE, the GNSO Council recommends to the ICANN Board of
Directors that:

1. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN
staff must keep on record, a valid physical address for the purpose of
receiving legal service. This record must include a valid street
address, city, appropriate region, telephone number and fax number. 
Registrars must publish this information on their respective web sites,
and must notify ICANN staff and update their published addresses within
30 days of a change of address.

2. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN
staff must keep on record, the names of each registrar’s respective
corporate President, Vice President, and Secretary, or the appropriate
equivalents of those positions. These data may be made available upon
request to a verified representative of a law enforcement agency, in a
manner agreed to by ICANN staff, ICANN-accredited registrars, and
representatives of law enforcement agencies. Registrars will notify
ICANN of any changes in this information within 30 days of a change.

3. ICANN-accredited registrars must publish on their respective web
sites e-mail and postal mail addresses to which law enforcement actions
may be directed. The e-mail address will use a uniform convention
(example: lawenforcement@xxxxxxxxxxx) to facilitate ease of use by law
enforcement agencies. Registrars may, at their individual discretion,
include language in this section of their web sites, directed to the
general public, that makes clear the use and expected outcomes of these
points of contact and identifies the appropriate points of contact for
other forms of business. Requests submitted by verified law enforcement
agencies to this discrete point of contact must receive an
acknowledgement of receipt from the registrar within 24 hours.

4. Law enforcement agencies provide, within six months of the date
of approval of this policy by the ICANN Board and via the general advice
of the GAC to the Board, their recommendations for a database and
identification system that allows for expedient identification to a
registrar of a law enforcement agency, and verification of the
contacting party as a law enforcement agency upon that agency’s first
contact with a registrar.

5. Implementation and execution of these recommendations be monitored by
the GNSO. Specifically:

a. ICANN staff will analyze and report to the GNSO at six-month
intervals for one year following implementation, until such time as the
GNSO resolves otherwise, with the intention of determining:

i. How effectively and to what extent the policies have been
implemented and followed by Registrars, and

ii. Whether or not modifications to these policies should be
considered by the GNSO as a result of experiences during the
implementation and monitoring stages.

b. The purpose of these monitoring and reporting requirements are to
allow the GNSO to determine when, if ever, these recommendations and any
ensuing policy require additional amendment, clarification or attention
based on the results of the reports prepared by ICANN staff.