ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

RE: [council] Motion on the Initiation of a Policy Development Process on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse

  • To: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] Motion on the Initiation of a Policy Development Process on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse
  • From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:40:10 -0800
  • Accept-language: fr-FR, en-US
  • Acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US
  • In-reply-to: <02ea01cdbd22$c6ad5b40$540811c0$@ipracon.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <02ea01cdbd22$c6ad5b40$540811c0$@ipracon.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Ac29IQiODyVHc6efSZu6kauVrWV8bwAF8DDQ
  • Thread-topic: [council] Motion on the Initiation of a Policy Development Process on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse

The motion has been posted on page

https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+15+November+
2012

kind regards,

 

Glen

 

Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://gnso.icann.org

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: mercredi 7 novembre 2012 21:02
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Motion on the Initiation of a Policy Development Process
on Uniformity of Contracts to Address Registration Abuse

 

Fellow Councillors,

You may recall that this motion was made in advance of, and was therefore on
the agenda, of our Toronto meeting.

In the event, the motion was not seconded before or in Toronto and was
withdrawn prior to the Council voting on it.

Moreover, the motion has not yet been resubmitted for consideration at our
forthcoming meeting (15 November 2012).

However, an Issues Report was requested by the Council and since we now have
the Final Issues Report, 
I understand that our procedures require us to vote on whether or not to
initiate a PDP and to not defer this vote for more than one meeting.

Therefore, for procedural reasons, I am re-submitting the motion below to
the Council for consideration and to be voted on at our forthcoming meeting
(15 November 2012).

Thank-you,

 

Jonathan

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

WHEREAS:

The Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAPWG) recommended in its
Final Report 'the creation of an Issues Report to evaluate whether a minimum
baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in-scope
ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to
address the most common forms of registration abuse';

The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report to evaluate whether a minimum
baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in scope
ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to
address the most common forms of registration abuse on 6 October 2011;

ICANN Staff posted the Preliminary Issue Report on Uniformity of Contracts
on 25 July 2012 for public comment (see
<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/uoc-prelim-issue-report-25jul12
-en.htm>
http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/uoc-prelim-issue-report-25jul12-
en.htm);

ICANN Staff reviewed the comments received and updated the report
accordingly;

The Final Issue Report on Uniformity of Contracts was published on 20
September 2012;

The Final Issue Report recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a
Policy Development Process limited to consideration of the issues discussed
in this report, and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the topic is
properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope
of the GNSO.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

The GNSO will initiate a PDP on the issues defined in the Final Issue Report
on Uniformity of Contracts (link)

A DT will be formed to create a charter for a Working Group, which will be
submitted to the GNSO Council for its approval.

Following the approval of the charter, a Working Group will be created for
the purpose of fulfilling the requirements of the PDP."

 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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