[ispcp] GNSO Council meeting 09 June

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

All:

The following motions passed at the council meeting today:

Motion 1. WHOIS Registrant Identification Study Motion May 2011: 
Made by Jonathan Robinson
Seconded by: John Berard
Whereas:
In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and
objective understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD Whois
system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts
(http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/).
On 4 March 2009, the GNSO Council requested Staff to conduct research on
feasibility and cost estimates for selected Whois studies and report its
findings to Council. (See Motion 3,
http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#200903
<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/> ).
On 23-Mar-2010, Staff presented a report on the feasibility and cost
estimates for a Whois "Registrant Identification" Study, finding that
the study would cost approximately $150,000 (USD) and take approximately
one year to complete
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-studies-report-for-gnso-23mar1
0-en.pdf). This exploratory study would examine Whois data for a
representative sample of gTLD domain names to classify the types of
entities that register domains, including natural persons, various kinds
of legal persons and Privacy and Proxy service providers.
On 28 April 2011 the Council deferred consideration of the Whois
Registrant Identification Study until the 9 June 2011 meeting and
requested that any applicable motions in that regard be submitted not
later than 1 June 2011.
On 20 May 2011 a volunteer Whois studies group submitted to the GNSO
Council revised Whois Registrant Identification Study Terms of Reference
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may
11-en.pdf
supporting Rationale
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-registrant-id-study-rationale-2
0may11-en.pdf
and Summary of Changes
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/summary-changes-whois-registrant-id-s
tudy-tor-20may11-en.pdf
Resolved;
The Council requests that ICANN staff proceed with the Whois Registrant
Identification Study as set forth in the revised Terms of Reference
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/tor-whois-registrant-id-studies-20may
11-en.pdf
Further resolved, the Council asks staff to report back to the Council
if the original estimate for the study of $150,000 USD is exceeded by
greater than 20%.
Further resolved, in recognition of the substantial amount of
coordination needed to direct the research, that staff be given the
discretion to manage this study serially or in parallel with the other
Whois studies, with a goal of expediting completion of all of the
studies as efficiently as possible.


Motion 3: To Acknowledge the Receipt of the Policy Development Process
Work Team Final Report and Initiate a Public Comment Period:
Made by: Jeff Neuman 
Seconded by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see
GNSO Council Improvement Implementation Plan;
(http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-impl
ementation-plan-16oct08.pdf) for implementing the various GNSO
Improvements identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on
26 June 2008
(http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182
<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm> )
(http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm);
WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two
Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the
Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the
efforts of five community work teams in developing specific
recommendations to implement the improvements;
WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Policy
Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT), which was chartered to develop a
new policy development process that incorporates a working group
approach and makes it more effective and responsive to ICANN's policy
development needs;
WHEREAS, the GNSO Council decided to terminate the PPSC on 28 April 2011
and instructed the PDP-WT to deliver its Final Report directly to the
GNSO Council;
WHEREAS, the PDP-WT submitted its Final Report,
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-31may11-en.htm, on 31
May 2011 to the GNSO Council;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the PDP-WT Final
Report as delivered by the PDP-WT and directs ICANN Staff to commence a
thirty (30) day public comment period on this Final Report.
RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the PDP-WT
Final Report as soon as possible after the end of the public comment
period.
RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a concise summary
of the new Policy Development Process be drafted by ICANN Staff,
following approval of the new PDP by the ICANN Board, in order to serve
as a primer to the new Annex A of the ICANN Bylaws and PDP Manual for
potential PDP WG members

2. Motion regarding the JAS milestone report
Made by: Rafik Dammak
Seconded by: Andrei Kolesnikov
Amended by Jeff Neuman 
Whereas: 
The GNSO Council and ALAC established the Joint SO/AC Working Group
(JASWG) on support for new gTLD applicants in April of 2010; and 
The Working Group released it Milestone Report posted for consideration
by the Board, Chartering Organizations and at-large Community. This
report documented the completion of work as defined in the orignal
charter and requested an update to the Working Groups charter, and 
The GNSO and ALAC, separately, renewed the Working Groups charter with
additional work item in February 2011, and 
The Joint SO/AC Working Group received and discussed the public
comments, and 
The Joint SO/AC Working Group has completed the work as defined in its
extended charter and published a second milestone report
(https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/JAS+Issues+and+Recommendation
s#) on 8 May 2011 covering those chartered items
(http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20110113-1
<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/> ) entitled JAS Milestone Report.
and 
The GNSO Council does not wish to delay the start of the new gTLD
application process, and 
The GNSO Council does not wish to delay implementation of support
programs for applicants from developing regions, 
RESOLVED: 
The GNSO Council thanks the members of the Joint SO/AC Working Group for
its efforts and its dedication to completing the work on such a tight
schedule, and 
The GNSO Council requests that the report be put out for community
review as soon as possible, and 
The GNSO Council forwards the second JAS Milestone Report to the ICANN
board for informational purposes to demonstrate the progress made by the
JAS WG so that it may refer to that progress in their discussions with
the GAC, 
The GNSO Council requests that ICANN staff begin assessing whether the
recommendations are implementable, and 
The JAS Working Group continues working to deal with any issues that may
arise in the upcoming review by the community, and 
That the JAS Working group publish their final report after this review
process. 
Resolved further, that the GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Chair to
communicate its decision to the ALAC Chair.

Kind regards
Wolf-Ulrich