Re: [council] RE: Proposed Agenda for the GNSO Council teleconference 21 January 2016 at 21:00 UTC
Hi Phil, Here it is: Please click on the link below to join the GNSO Council Adobe Connect room with sound enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/gnsocouncil/ Best regards, Julie From: <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thursday, January 21, 2016 3:54 PM 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 > What is the Adobe link for this call??? > > > 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+201> 6 > This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating > Procedures, <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/op-procedures-24jun15-en.pdf> > 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 > <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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/projects-list.pdf> and Action List > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items> > 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 GNSO¹s policy principles > and recommendations from its 2007 Final Report on the Introduction of New > Generic Top Level Domains > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm> . > Preparation of the Preliminary Issue Report was based on a set of deliverables > from the GNSO¹s New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Discussion Group > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2015/non-pdp-new-gtld> > (DG) as the basis for analysis. The Preliminary Issue Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-prelim-issue- > 31aug15-en.pdf> 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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/subsequent-procedures-final-issue-0 > 4dec15-en.pdf> 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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/new-gtld-subsequent-procedures-charter-12jan1 > 6-en.pdf> for adoption. > 4.1 Presentation of the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+20 > 16> (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 > <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm#7> > 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 approved > <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-27jun13-en.htm> by > 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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/raa-pp-charter-22oct13-en.pdf> the Privacy & > Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working Group to develop policy > recommendations intended to guide ICANN¹s implementation of the planned > accreditation program for privacy and proxy service providers. The PDP Working > Group published its Initial Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-initial-05may15-en.pdf> for public > comment in May 2015, and delivered its Final Report > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/raa/ppsai-final-07dec15-en.pdf> 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 Group¹s Final > Report, and vote on whether to adopt the consensus recommendations contained > in it. > 5.1 Presentation of the motion > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+20 > 16> (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 > <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+21+January+20 > 16> (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 > <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> for > public comment on 1 June 2015. Following feedback received, including from the > GNSO Working Party, Westlake published its Final Report > <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-15sep15-en.pdf> > on 15 September. The Working Party has been reviewing the recommendations to > develop guidance for the GNSO Council and ICANN Board¹s 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 ICANN¹s > historical contractual relationship with the United States government. The > community discussions indicated that existing ICANN accountability mechanisms > do not yet meet some stakeholders¹ 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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/enhancing-accountability-charter-03nov14-en.p > df> of a Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability > (CCWG-Accountability <https://community.icann.org/x/ogDxAg> ) of which the > GNSO is a chartering organization. > The CCWG-Accountability¹s Third Draft Proposal was published > <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-2015 > -11-30-en> 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 <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#AnnexA> ): 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 > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf> ) > 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 > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/pst.html> ) > UTC-7+1DST 13:00 > San José, Costa Rica UTC-6+0DST 15:00 > Iowa City, USA (CDT <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%E2%88%9206:00> ) > UTC-6+0DST 15:00 > New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 16:00 > Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART > <http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/sa/art.html> ) > 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 > <http://timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/au/wst.html> ) > 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://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 <mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > http://gnso.icann.org <http://gnso.icann.org/> > > > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> > Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16 > Internal Virus Database is out of date. Attachment:
smime.p7s |