<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
...and I look forward to see the draft letter to the CCWG – maybe tomorrow
morning??
Good night!
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Phil Corwin
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:14 PM
To: Marika Konings ; Glen de Saint Géry ; mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference
21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Thanks for the update, Marika. I shall look forward to reviewing the updated
agenda.
Best, Philip
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 9:12 AM
To: Phil Corwin; Glen de Saint Géry; GNSO Council List (council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: Re: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference
21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Importance: High
Dear Phil,
In relation to the first item, please note that the agenda was drafted prior to
the last meeting and does not reflect yet the deferral of the consideration of
the draft letter. The GNSO Leadership Team is meeting later today so I expect
you can anticipate an updated agenda following that call.
Best regards,
Marika
From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday 19 January 2016 at 07:50
To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, "GNSO Council List
(council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21
January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Fellow Councilors:
I have some concerns regarding this most recent proposed agenda for our Council
call which takes place in 55 hours.
The primary concern is that it allocates only ten minutes to “UPDATE &
Discussion – Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability”,
and places it as one of the last items on the agenda. To my mind the
finalization of our letter to the CCWG-ACCT is our top priority at this moment,
and we have yet to see a draft letter reflecting our discussion of 1/14. I
would suggest that review, modification, and adoption of that draft letter
(assuming it will be circulated before Thursday’s call, which is imperative) be
placed first on the agenda and that more than ten minutes be allocated to it.
My other concern relates to “Vote on motion: Initiation of Policy Development
Process (PDP) to review all RPMs in all gTLDs for (20 minutes)”.
We are scheduled on Thursday, after disposing of our CCWG-ACCT
responsibilities, to “VOTE ON MOTION – Charter for Policy Development Process
(PDP) Working Group on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures (15 minutes)” – which I
think we can do, although it may take more than 15 minutes – as well as to
“VOTE ON MOTION – Adoption of Final Report from the Privacy & Proxy Services
Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group (20 minutes)”. So those are two weighty
items that require discussion and vote, after we wrap up on the CCWG
Accountability proposal.
I am in general agreement with the staff suggestions on how to handle the RPM
review, but am concerned that cramming our entire discussion and subsequent
vote on it into a Council meeting that is already quite full of important and
complex matters risks missing some important points that we might want to
include within a Charter for this PDP.
I welcome Council members’ feedback in regard to Thursday’s agenda.
Best to all, Philip
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:46 PM
To: GNSO Council List (council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: [council] Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21
January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Dear Councillors,
Please find the Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January
2016 at 21:00 UTC
Also posted on the Wiki at:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Agenda+21+January+2016
and on the website:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/agenda-council-21jan16-en.htm
Motions posted on page:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+2016
This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures,
approved and updated on 24 June 2015.
For convenience:
· An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is
provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
· An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the
absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.
Coordinated Universal Time: 21:00 UTC
http://tinyurl.com/zjkmew8
13:00 Los Angeles; 16:00 Washington; 21:00 London; 23:00 Istanbul; 08:00 Hobart
Friday 22 January
GNSO Council Meeting Audio Cast
To join the event click on the link: http://stream.icann.org:8000/gnso.m3u
Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be
able to attend and/or need a dial out call.
___________________________________________
Item 1: Administrative matters (5 minutes)
1.1 – Roll call
1.2 – Updates to Statements of Interest
1.3 – Review/amend agenda.
1.4 – Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the
GNSO Operating Procedures:
Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting of 14 January 2016 will be posted as
approved on xxxxx 2016
Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes)
2.1 – Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics,
to include review of Projects List and Action List
Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
Item 4: VOTE ON MOTION – Charter for Policy Development Process (PDP) Working
Group on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures (15 minutes)
In June 2015, the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report to analyze subjects
that may lead to changes or adjustments for subsequent New gTLD procedures,
including any modifications that may be needed to the GNSO’s policy principles
and recommendations from its 2007 Final Report on the Introduction of New
Generic Top Level Domains. Preparation of the Preliminary Issue Report was
based on a set of deliverables from the GNSO’s New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Discussion Group (DG) as the basis for analysis. The Preliminary Issue Report
was published for public comment on 31 August 2015, and the comment period
closed on 30 October as a result of a request by the GNSO Council to extend the
usual 40-day comment period. The Final Issue Report was submitted to the GNSO
Council on 4 December 2015. During its meeting on 17 December, the Council
initiated the PDP but deferred consideration of the Charter for the PDP Working
Group to this meeting. Here the Council will review the revised charter for
adoption.
4.1 – Presentation of the motion (Donna Austin)
4.2 – Discussion
4.3 – Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than
one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House)
Item 5: VOTE ON MOTION – Adoption of Final Report from the Privacy & Proxy
Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group (20 minutes)
This PDP had been requested by the ICANN Board when initiating negotiations
with the Registrar Stakeholder Group in October 2011 for a new form of
Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). The 2013 RAA was approvedby the ICANN
Board in June 2013, at which time the accreditation of privacy and proxy
services was identified as the remaining issue not dealt with in the
negotiations or in other policy activities, and that was suited for a PDP. In
October 2013, the GNSO Council chartered the Privacy & Proxy Services
Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group to develop policy recommendations
intended to guide ICANN’s implementation of the planned accreditation program
for privacy and proxy service providers. The PDP Working Group published its
Initial Report for public comment in May 2015, and delivered its Final Report
to the GNSO Council on 7 December 2015. Consideration of this item was deferred
from the 17 December meeting. Here the Council will review the Working Group’s
Final Report, and vote on whether to adopt the consensus recommendations
contained in it.
5.1 – Presentation of the motion (James Bladel)
5.2 – Discussion
5.3 – Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than
two-thirds (2/3) of each House or more than three-fourths (3/4) of one House
and one-half (1/2) of the other House)
Item 6: Vote on motion:Initiation of Policy Development Process (PDP) to review
all RPMs in all gTLDs for (20 minutes)
In December 2011 the GNSO Council requested a new Issue Report on the current
state of all rights protection mechanisms implemented for both existing and new
gTLDs, including but not limited to, the UDRP and URS. The Final Issue Report
on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures was published on 11 January 2015 at
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active/rpm. The Final Issue Report
recommends that the GNSO Council proceed with a two-phased Policy Development
Process (PDP) in order to the review Rights Protection Mechanisms in the new
gTLDs and, in a subsequent, second phase, review the Uniform Dispute Resolution
Policy (UDRP), and the General Counsel of ICANN has indicated the review topics
are properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and within the scope
of the GNSO. Here the Council will review the report, including the draft
Charter setting out the proposed scope of the PDP, and vote on whether to
initiate the PDP and adopt the Charter.
6.1 – Presentation of the motion (Amr Elsadr)
6.2 – Discussion
6.3 – Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than
one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House)
ITEM 7: UPDATE & Discussion – GNSO Review (15 minutes)
As part of ICANN's Bylaws-mandated periodic review of its structures, the ICANN
Board's Structural Improvements Committee appointed Westlake Governance as the
independent examiner to conduct the current review of the performance and
operations of the GNSO. A GNSO Working Party, chaired by former Councillor
Jennifer Wolfe and comprising representatives of all the GNSO's Stakeholder
Groups and Constituencies, was formed to consult with Westlake over the design
and conduct of the review. Westlake's Draft Report was published for public
comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from the GNSO
Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report on 15 September. The Working
Party has been reviewing the recommendations to develop guidance for the GNSO
Council and ICANN Board’s consideration in relation to the implementability and
priority of these recommendations. Here the Council will receive an update from
the Review Working Party and discuss next steps.
7.1 – Update (Jen Wolfe)
7.2 – Discussion
7.3 – Next steps
Item 8: UPDATE & Discussion – Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN
Accountability (10 minutes)
In the course of discussions over the IANA stewardship transition, the
community had raised concerns about ICANN's accountability, given ICANN’s
historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The
community discussions indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms
do not yet meet some stakeholders’ expectations. As that the U.S. government
(through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA))
has stressed that it expects community consensus on the transition, this gap
between the current situation and stakeholder expectations needed to be
addressed. This resulted in the creation of a Cross Community Working Group on
Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability) of which the GNSO is a
chartering organization.
The CCWG-Accountability’s Third Draft Proposal was published for public comment
on 30 November 2015. The GNSO Council discussed input to this proposal during
its meeting on 14 January 2016. Here the Council will receive an update on the
progress of the CCWG -Accountability, specifically the timeline and
consideration of input provided by the GNSO Council and its SG/Cs.
8.1 – Update (Thomas Rickert)
8.2 – Discussion
8.3 – Next steps
Item 9: UPDATE & Discussion – Marrakesh Meeting Planning (10 minutes)
During the Dublin meeting, Susan Kawaguchi and Amr Elsadr volunteered to work
with the GNSO Council Leadership on the development of the proposed agenda for
the GNSO Weekend Session in Marrakech. Here the Council will receive a status
update on the planning for Marrakesh and any action that may be required from
the GNSO Council.
9.1 – Status update (Susan Kawaguchi / Amr Elsadr)
9.2 – Discussion
9.3 – Next steps
Item 10:Any Other Business (10 Minutes)
_________________________________
Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3)
9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO
Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or
other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting
thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
a. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than
one-fourth (1/4) vote of each House or majority of one House.
b. Initiate a Policy Development Process ("PDP") Within Scope (as described in
Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each
House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House.
c. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of GNSO
Supermajority.
d. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Within Scope: requires an affirmative
vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3)
of one House.
e. Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an
affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority.
f. Changes to an Approved PDP Team Charter: For any PDP Team Charter approved
under d. or e. above, the GNSO Council may approve an amendment to the Charter
through a simple majority vote of each House.
g. Terminate a PDP: Once initiated, and prior to the publication of a Final
Report, the GNSO Council may terminate a PDP only for significant cause, upon a
motion that passes with a GNSO Supermajority Vote in favor of termination.
h. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO
Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups
supports the Recommendation.
i. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an
affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,
j. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting
Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of
the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority
vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.
k. Modification of Approved PDP Recommendation: Prior to Final Approval by the
ICANN Board, an Approved PDP Recommendation may be modified or amended by the
GNSO Council with a GNSO Supermajority vote.
l. A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (a) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council
members of each House, or (b) three-fourths (3/4) of one House and a majority
of the other House."
Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures 4.4)
4.4.1 Applicability
Absentee voting is permitted for the following limited number of Council
motions or measures.
a. Initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP);
b. Approve a PDP recommendation;
c. Recommend amendments to the GNSO Operating Procedures (GOP) or ICANN Bylaws;
d. Fill a Council position open for election.
4.4.2 Absentee ballots, when permitted, must be submitted within the announced
time limit, which shall be 72 hours from the meeting's adjournment. In
exceptional circumstances, announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may
reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 calendar days, provided
such amendment is verbally confirmed by all Vice-Chairs present.
4.4.3 The GNSO Secretariat will administer, record, and tabulate absentee votes
according to these procedures and will provide reasonable means for
transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by
telephone, e- mail, web-based interface, or other technologies as may become
available.
4.4.4 Absentee balloting does not affect quorum requirements. (There must be a
quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.)
Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) UTC 21:00
Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
California, USA (PDT) UTC-7+1DST 13:00
San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 15:00
Iowa City, USA (CDT) UTC-6+0DST 15:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3+0DST 18:00
Rio de Janiero, Brazil (BRST) UTC-2+0DST 19:00
London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 21:00
Bonn, Germany (CET) UTC+1+0DST 22:00
Cairo, Egypt, (EET) UTC+2+0DST 23:00
Istanbul, Turkey (EEST) UTC+3+0DST 23:00
Perth, Australia (WST) UTC+8+1DST 05:00 next day
Singapore (SGT) UTC +8 05:00 next day
Sydney/Hobart, Australia (AEDT) UTC+11+0DST 08:00 next day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2016, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with
exceptions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com
http://tinyurl.com/ha4rugt
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|