[council] Fwd: IRTP-D Motion

[Mason Cole <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Councilors --
> 
> In her initial email, Marika helpfully suggested that the council consider 
> the motion below AND, simultaneously, a motion to approve the charter.  I 
> missed the charter portion of her message (entirely my error) and did not 
> include it in my motion.
> 
> I would like to add a motion now to approve the charter.  I fully realize we 
> are beyond the deadline for motions for next week's meeting, so I will ask 
> the chair now if the deadline can be waived due to this oversight, and I ask 
> the council if anyone would object to this.
> 
> I therefore move for the adoption of this additional motion, as follows:
> 
> Motion for Approval of a Charter for the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy 
> (IRTP) Part D Working Group (WG)
> 
>  
> 
> Whereas
> 
>  
> 
> On [date] the GNSO Council initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) on 
> the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D and decided to create a PDP 
> Working Group for the purposes of fulfilling the requirements of the PDP;
> 
>  
> 
> The GNSO Council has reviewed the charter.
> 
>  
> 
> RESOLVED,
> 
>  
> 
> The GSNO Council approves the charter and appoints [to be confirmed] as the 
> GNSO Council Liaison to the IRTP Part D PDP Working Group.
> 
>  
> 
> The GNSO Council further directs that the work of the IRTP Part D WG be 
> initiated no later then 14 days after the approval of this motion. Until such 
> time as the WG can select a chair and that chair can be confirmed by the GNSO 
> Council, the GNSO Council Liaison shall act as interim chair.
> 
>  
> 
> Charter
> 
>  
> 
> The Working Group shall consider the following questions as outlined in the 
> Final Issue Report ([include link to Final Issue Report]) and make 
> recommendations to the GNSO Council:
> 
> IRTP Dispute Policy Enhancements
> 
> a)         Whether reporting requirements for registries and dispute 
> providers should be developed, in order to make precedent and trend 
> information available to the community and allow reference to past cases in 
> dispute submissions;
> 
> b)         Whether additional provisions should be included in the TDRP 
> (Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy) on how to handle disputes when multiple 
> transfers have occurred;
> 
> c)          Whether dispute options for registrants should be developed and 
> implemented as part of the policy (registrants currently depend on registrars 
> to initiate a dispute on their behalf);
> 
> d)         Whether requirements or best practices should be put into place 
> for registrars to make information on transfer dispute resolution options 
> available to registrants;
> 
> Penalties for IRTP Violations
> 
> e)         Whether existing penalties for policy violations are sufficient or 
> if additional provisions/penalties for specific violations should be added 
> into the policy;
> 
> Need for FOAs
> 
> f)           Whether the universal adoption and implementation of EPP 
> AuthInfo codes has eliminated the need of FOAs.
> 
>  
> 
> The Working Group shall follow the rules outlined in the GNSO Working Group 
> Guidelines 
> http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-07apr11-en.pdf.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Mason Cole wrote:
> 
>> Council colleagues --
>> 
>> I move for the adoption of the attached motion during our next council 
>> meeting.  I would appreciate a second to the motion.
>> 
>> Thank you!
>> 
>> Mason
>> 
>> 
>> Initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Inter-Registrar 
>> Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D
>> 
>> Whereas
>>  
>> The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) is an existing consensus policy 
>> under review by the GNSO;
>>  
>> The GNSO Transfers Working Group identified a number of issues in its review 
>> of the current Policy and those issues have been grouped into suggested 
>> PDPs, set A-E, as per the Council's resolution of 8 May 2008;
>>  
>> The GNSO Council requested an Issue Report on IRTP Part D at its meeting on 
>> 17 October 2012 (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/resolutions#20121017-4);
>>  
>> A Preliminary Issue Report on IRTP Part D was published on 14 November 2012 
>> for public comment (see 
>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/irtp-d-prelim-issue-report-14nov12-en.htm).;
>>  
>> A Final Issue Report on IRTP Part D was published on 8 January 2012 (see 
>> [include link to Final Issue Report]);
>>  
>> 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
>>  
>> RESOLVED:
>>  
>> The GNSO will initiate a PDP on the issues defined in the Final Issue Report 
>> on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part D ([include link to Final Issue 
>> Report]).
>>  
>> A Working Group will be created for the purpose of fulfilling the 
>> requirements of the PDP.
> 
> Mason Cole 
> VP Communications & Industry Relations
> Donuts Inc.
> …………………………………………
> mason@xxxxxxxxx
> Ofc +1 503 908 7623
> Cell +1 503 407 2555
>