<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] (Draft) MOTION - IAG Report and Recommended Modifications to WHOIS Conflict Procedure
I’d like to second the motion.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 10:38 AM
To: mailto:council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] (Draft) MOTION - IAG Report and Recommended Modifications to
WHOIS Conflict Procedure
Dear All,
James Bladel proposed the motion that has been posted on the Council Wiki page:
https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+1+September+2016
We are calling for a seconder.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Glen
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org
Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO
Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the
GNSO Newcomer pages.
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:19 AM
To: GNSO Council List <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [council] (Draft) MOTION - IAG Report and Recommended Modifications to
WHOIS Conflict Procedure
Council Colleagues -
In compliance with our Documents & Motions deadline, I hereby submit the
following motion (attached and copied below) for consideration during our next
meeting on 1 SEP.
Also: please note that the RrSG is still discussing its position on this
motion. Accordingly, my submission of it shouldn’t be taken as endorsement of
the current language, as my ExCom may yet instruct me to raise amendments or
abstain from voting.
Thank you—
J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Draft motion – Confirmation that modification to procedure that implements the
Whois conflicts with privacy law policy recommendation is consistent with the
intent of the policy recommendation
Whereas,
In November 2005, the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) concluded a
policy development process (PDP) on Whois conflicts with privacy law, which
recommended the creation of a procedure to address conflicts between a
contracted party's Whois obligations and local/national privacy laws or
regulations.
The ICANN Board of Directors adopted the recommendations in May 2006 and the
final procedure was made effective in January 2008.
As noted in the GNSO Operating Procedures, “Periodic assessment of PDP
recommendations and policies is an important tool to guard against unexpected
results or inefficient processes arising from GNSO policies”. As called for in
Step 6 of the ICANN Procedure For Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law,
ICANN launched a review of the procedure in May 2014. Following a Call for
Volunteers addressed to all interested parties, an Implementation Advisory
Group (IAG) was formed to review the implementation of the policy
recommendations and began its work in January 2015. The IAG devoted most of its
time discussing whether additional triggers to invoke the procedure should be
incorporated and if so how to ensure that they remain consistent with the
existing policy.
On 26 May 2016, the IAG submitted its final report and recommendation to the
GNSO Council.
The IAG recommends a modification to the existing Whois Conflicts Procedure.
The modification would allow a party to trigger the procedure by obtaining a
written statement from the government agency charged with enforcing its data
privacy laws indicating that a particular Whois obligation conflicts with
national law and then submitting that statement to ICANN.
Resolved,
The GNSO Council has reviewed the IAG Final Report
(http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iag-review-whois-conflicts-procedure-23may16-en.pdf)
and concludes that the proposed modification to the procedure conforms to the
intent of the original policy recommendations and as such the GNSO Council
confirms its non-objection to the modification being implemented by GDD Staff
as outlined in Appendix I
(http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iag-review-whois-conflicts-procedure-appendix-1-23may16-en.pdf)
as soon as practically feasible.
The GNSO Council recommends that as soon as the modification has been
implemented all affected parties are informed accordingly.
Furthermore, the GNSO Council requests that ICANN staff monitor the
implementation of the modified procedure to determine whether the modification
addresses the issues identified by the IAG Final Report and report back
accordingly.
The GNSO Council thanks the IAG for its work and takes note of the minority
views included in the Final Report. The GNSO Council requests that these are
shared with the Next-Generation Registration Directory Services PDP Working
Group as the broader WHOIS issues raised in these views are expected to be
dealt with in that PDP.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|