ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] Message from Kurt Pritz

  • To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Message from Kurt Pritz
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 00:18:07 -0700
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Acceptlanguage: en-US
  • In-reply-to: <CBD0889C.54242%kurt@icann.org>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Ac0ufQ36pHweqfakTCWJ6J2P91iwNw==
  • Thread-topic: Message from Kurt Pritz
  • User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/

Dear All,

Please find below a message from Kurt Pritz in relation to agenda item 6 (JAS 
WG) and item 9.3 (URS) for today's GNSO Council meeting.

With best regards,


From: Kurt Pritz <kurt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:kurt@xxxxxxxxx>>
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: For the Council meeting

Council Members:

I am sorry that I could not join the Council meeting. Please accept the 
following brief report on issues that have raised by the Council leadership and 
through your email list. More information can be provided.



Uniform Rapid Suspension:
There is a budget line item identified as "URS Summit"
Implementation work conducted on the URS to date indicates that the the 
implementation will not attain the cost target of $300-$500 in URS fee per 
case. This is based on discussions with WIPO staff, direct communication with 
the IPC, and examples understood from the ICM registry and Nominet. Because the 
fee target is a primary goal of the URS, additional work and study should be 
undertaken to determine if amendments to the program might attain the fee goal 
and retain the safeguards and other features of the program. This study must be 
undertaken by a community group. While the scope of the effort is not yet 
defined, it was necessary to reserve resources for the work in the ICANN's FY13 
budget.The line item in the budget is the placeholder for those resources while 
the best way to accomplish the work can be designed. Again, the work will be 
done through a bottom-up, community discussion similar to the the work done to 
create and review the URS in the first instance. The timing of the budgeting 
process required that we create the line item before planning for this work 
could be drafted and worked through the community.

Joint Applicant Support Working Group
The GNSO Council approved an extension of the JAS charter on 22 September 2011 
in order to complete other reports (Milestone 2 report) that have since been 
completed, and to request that the Joint SO/AC Working Group remain on call to 
review the outcome of the ICANN implementation of the JAS recommendations.  
http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201109. We continue to review implementation 
details with the JAS – either the entire JAS or a sub-group selected by the 
JAS. Most notably, JAS members have recommended that the community play a role 
in in the planning for the recruitment, training and operation of the "SARP," 
the review panels that will evaluate financial assistance applications. This 
planning includes the idea that the SARP include a Community Member 
Representative or CMR. Additional information can be provided to the GNSO to 
augment information provided by the JAS. A report on the details can be made 
directly to the GNSO Council and ALAC if the Council indicates such a 

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>