Re: [council] Revised Motion for Council Meeting on Wednesday

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Please add me as a seconder

avri

On 24-Jun-14 11:38, Bret Fausett wrote:
> Here is a new version of the motion we discussed that makes two changes
> from the previous version: (a) it adopts Avri’s helpful suggestion that
> we change “subsequent application rounds” to “subsequent application
> procedures”, and I have made this change in both Section 1 and 2 of the
> “Resolved"; and (b) it changes the committee created in Section 1 from a
> Committee of the Council to a new “open committee”. Since this is just a
> committee to identify issues appropriate for an issues report, I thought
> it important to avoid calling it a working group, and I have had
> multiple expressions of interest in participating from outside the
> Council, so I thought it would be appropriate to keep the committee open. 
> 
> Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this, and I look forward to
> the discussion tomorrow. 
> 
> Glen, can you please add this version to the Council motion page?
> 
>        Bret
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *— START MOTION — *
> 
> *Whereas*, in 2005, this Council of the Generic Names Supporting
> Organization (GNSO) began a policy development process to consider the
> introduction of new gTLDs, which resulted in the creation of certain
> policy recommendations for the launch of a new gTLD application process;
> and,
> 
> *Whereas*, in September 2007, this Council adopted the policy
> recommendations from the GNSO policy development process and forwarded
> them to the ICANN Board of Directors; and,
> 
> *Whereas*, in June 2008, the ICANN Board adopted the GNSO's policy
> recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs and directed staff to
> develop an implementation plan for a new gTLD introduction process; and
> 
> *Whereas*, in September 2009, ICANN and the U.S. National
> Telecommunications Information Administration entered into an
> Affirmation of Commitments (“AOC”) in which ICANN committed to organize
> a review of certain aspects of the introduction and expansion of gTLDs
> (AOC, at Section 9.3); and,
> 
> *Whereas*, in its April, 2011 Communique, ICANN’s Governmental Advisory
> Committee (“GAC”) asked (at p.6) for a "comprehensive post-launch
> independent review of the [Trademark] Clearinghouse [to] be conducted
> one year after the launch of the 75th new gTLD in the round;” and, 
> 
> *Whereas*, in June 2011, the ICANN Board approved an Application
> Guidebook ("AGB") for new gTLDs and authorized the launch of the New
> gTLD Program; and,
> 
> *Whereas*, the AGB provided that it was intended to govern "the first
> round of what is to be an ongoing process for the introduction of new
> TLDs" (Application, Module 2); and,
> 
> *Whereas*, Section 1.1.6 of the AGB ("Subsequent Application Rounds")
> provided that "ICANN’s goal [was] to launch subsequent gTLD application
> rounds as quickly as possible" and promised to base the timing of
> subsequent rounds on "experiences gained and changes required after this
> round is completed" with a "goal...for the next application round to
> begin within one year of the close of the application submission period
> for the initial round.;" and
> 
> *Whereas*, the first round application submission period closed in June,
> 2012; and,
> 
> *Whereas*, the Council believes that it has a continuing interest and
> role to play in evaluating the experiences of the first round and
> proposing policy recommendations, if necessary, for changes to
> subsequent rounds;
> 
> *Now therefore, it is resolved:*
> 
> *1. *The GNSO Council creates a new open committee to discuss the
> experiences gained by the first round of new gTLD applications and
> identify subjects for future issue reports, if any, that might lead to
> changes or adjustments for subsequent application procedures; and,
> 
> *2.* ICANN invites the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board to
> provide input into the GNSO Council discussion to identify areas that it
> believes may be appropriate for discussion for an evaluation of the
> current gTLD application round and/or for possible adjustments for
> subsequent application procedures; and,
> 
> *3.* The GNSO Council requests a status report from ICANN Staff on the
> current progress of (a) the New gTLD program generally; (b) ICANN's
> anticipated timeline and work plan for the review specified in Section
> 9.3 of the Affirmation of Commitments; (c) ICANN's work to date on any
> evaluation of the first round; (d) the work to date on the post-launch
> independent review of the Trademark Clearinghouse; and (e) ICANN's
> current projection for a timetable for subsequent rounds.
> 
> *— END MOTION — *
> 
> 
> --
> Bret Fausett, Esq. • General Counsel, Uniregistry, Inc. 
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200 • Playa Vista, CA 90094-2536
> 310-496-5755 (T) • 310-985-1351 (M) • bret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:bret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> — — — — — 
> 
> 
> 
>