Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Council Resolutions 2020 - Current

Last Updated:
27 October 2021

2021

January | February | March | April | May | June | July | August | September | October

2020

January | February | May | June | July | August | September | October | November | December

 

20211027-1

Consent Agenda

Appointment of the GNSO Council Liaison to the New Generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) Subsequent Procedures Operational Design Phase (ODP)

Submitted by Carlton Samuels

Seconded by Flip Petillion

(updated with the friendly amendment proposed by Tatiana Tropina and accepted by Carlton Samuels and Flip Petillion)

Whereas,

  1. On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council approved the Affirmations, Recommendations, and Implementation Guidance (collectively referred to as "Outputs") contained in the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process Working Group’s Final Report that were determined to have received either Full Consensus or Consensus designations.

  2. In its resolution to approve the outputs, the GNSO Council requested that the ICANN Board initiate   an Operational Design Phase on the Final Report as soon as possible.

  3. On 31 August 2021, in anticipation of an Operational Design Phase being initiated, the GNSO  Council launched an Expression of Interest process to solicit volunteers to serve in the role of GNSO Council Liaison to the ODP.

  4. On 12 September 2021, the ICANN Board passed a resolution directing ICANN’s President and CEO, or his designee(s), to conduct the Operational Design Phase (ODP).

  5. The GNSO Council tasked the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) with reviewing applications for the ODP Liaison role and recommending one individual for the GNSO to appoint.

  6. The SSC reviewed the three applications received, taking into account the criteria outlined in the EOI announcement.

  7. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 14 October 2021, by way of submission of the relevant motion.

  8. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

Resolved,
  1. The GNSO Council appoints Jeff Neuman to serve as GNSO Council Liaison to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures ODP.

  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the ICANN org ODP team.

  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the nominated candidate that he has been selected to fulfil the responsibilities defined in the EoI.

  4. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to those applicants who were not nominated, thanking them for their interest and encouraging them to apply for  future opportunities as they arise.

Vote results

Reappointment of GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)

Submitted by: Philippe Fouquart

Seconded by: Pam Little

Whereas:

  1. As part of the discussions within ICANN between the GNSO and GAC on how to facilitate early engagement of the GAC in GNSO policy development activities, the option of appointing a GNSO liaison to the GAC was initially piloted in FY15 and F16, and subsequently confirmed by the GNSO Council as a permanent role at the start of FY17.
  2. The GNSO Council appointed Jeffrey Neuman to the role of GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee on 21 October 2020, until the end of the ICANN AGM 2021.
  3. The GNSO Council has an obligation to review the role annually and reconfirm the appointment unless the review indicates otherwise and/or the Liaison has indicated that he/she is no longer available to continue in this role, in which case a new selection process will take place.
  4. On 23 September 2021, the GNSO Council approved the updated role description for the GNSO liaison to the GAC.  Subsequently, GNSO Council leadership has met with Jeffrey Neuman to discuss his experience and to confirm that he is willing to continue in this role in light of the updated role description.
  5. The GNSO Council has reviewed the annual report prepared by the GNSO Liaison to the GAC (see https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/gnso-liaison-to-gac-16oct21-en.pdf).

Resolved:

  1. The GNSO Council hereby reappoints Jeffrey Neuman to the role of GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee until the end of the ICANN AGM 20222.
  2. The GNSO Council leadership team will inform the GAC leadership team accordingly, and will co-ordinate with Jeffrey Neuman as well as the GAC leadership team and GAC Secretariat on next steps and the continued successful implementation of this role.

Vote results

20211027-2

Adoption of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2A Final Report and Recommendations

Submitted by Pam Little

Seconded by Tatiana Tropina

WHEREAS
  1. On 17 May 2018, the ICANN Board adopted the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data (“Temporary Specification”) pursuant to the procedures in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement concerning the establishment of Temporary Policies;

  2. Following the adoption of the Temporary Specification, and per the procedure for Temporary Policies as outlined in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement, a Consensus Policy development process as set forth in ICANN's Bylaws needs to be initiated immediately and completed within a one-year time period from the implementation effective date (25 May 2018) of the Temporary Specification;

  3. The GNSO Council has had a number of discussions about next steps to clarify issues around scope, timing and expectations, including a meeting between the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Chairs on 21 May 2018, the Council meeting on 24 May 2018, a meeting between the ICANN Board and the GNSO Council on 5 June 2018 and an extraordinary GNSO Council meeting on 12 June 2018;

  4. Subsequently, the GNSO Council agreed to form a drafting team, consisting of Council leadership and interested Council members, to develop the EPDP Initiation Request and EPDP Team Charter. The drafting team submitted the proposed EPDP Initiation Request and EPDP Team Charter to the GNSO Council on 19 July 2018;

  5. The GNSO Council approved the EPDP Initiation Request (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-gtld-rd-epdp-initiation-request-19jul18-en.pdf) and the EPDP Team Charter (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-gtld-rd-epdp-19jul18-en.pdf) on 19 July 2018;

  6. The EPDP Team divided the work into two phases; Phase 1 completed with the adoption of the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report on 4 March 2019, at which point the GNSO Council indicated its non-objection, as required per the EPDP Team Charter, for the EPDP Team to commence work on a System for Standardized Access/Disclosure to Non-Public Registration Data (“SSAD”) as well as other topics identified in Phase 2 of the Charter and/or carried over from Phase 1 (priority 2 items);

  7. The Phase 2 Final Report noted that “As a result of external dependencies and time constraints, this Final Report does not address all priority 2 items”. It furthermore noted that the EPDP Team would “consult with the GNSO Council on how to address the remaining priority 2 items”;

  8. Following these consultations, the GNSO Council adopted on 21 October 2020 instructions for the EPDP Phase 2A to address the remaining priority 2 items, namely 1) differentiation between legal and natural person registration data, and 2) feasibility of unique contacts to have a uniform anonymized email address;

  9. The EPDP Team commenced its deliberations on Phase 2A on 17 December 2020 (see https://community.icann.org/x/VojzC);

  10. The EPDP has followed the prescribed EPDP steps as stated in the Bylaws, including the publication of an Initial Report for public comment (see https://www.icann.org/public-comments/epdp-phase-2a-initial-report-2021-06-03-en) on 3 June 2021, resulting in a Final Report delivered on 3 September 2021 with an updated version containing all minority statements submitted on 13 September 2021;

  11. All recommendations received the consensus support of the EPDP Phase 2A Team but the Chair’s statement indicated that “it's important to note that some groups felt that the work did not go as far as needed, or did not include sufficient detail, while other groups felt that certain recommendations were not appropriate or necessary”;

  12. The GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed the Final Report and its recommendations.

RESOLVED
  1. The GNSO Council approves the EPDP Phase 2A Final Report and recommends to the ICANN Board of Directors the adoption of the EPDP Phase 2A recommendations #1 – 4.

  2. The GNSO Council requests ICANN org to convene an Implementation Review Team to work on the implementation of these recommendations. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with assisting ICANN org in developing the implementation details for the EPDP recommendations, evaluating the proposed implementation of the recommendations as approved by the Board, and working with ICANN org to ensure that the resultant implementation conforms to the intent of the approved recommendations. The Implementation Review Team shall operate in accordance with the Implementation Review Team Principles and Guidance approved by the GNSO Council in June 2015.

  3. The GNSO Council extends its sincere appreciation to the Chair, Keith Drazek, Vice Chair, Brian Beckham, EPDP Team members, alternates and support staff of the EPDP Team for their tireless efforts to deliver this Final Report.

Vote results

20211027-3 

Motion Withdrawn  - Motion for the Approval of the Revised GNSO Councilor Job Description for the Nominating Committee

Submitted by Pam Little

Seconded by Tomslin Samme-Nlar

Whereas,
  1. Section 11.3 of the ICANN Bylaws prescribes the number of Council representatives selected from each GNSO Stakeholder Group and three representatives selected by the Nominating Committee.

  2. The Contracted Parties House consists of three members from the Registries Stakeholder Group, three members from the Registrars Stakeholder Group, and one voting member appointed by the ICANN Nominating Committee for a total of seven voting members.

  3. The Non Contracted Parties House consists of six members from the Commercial Stakeholder Group, six members from the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group, and one voting member appointed by the ICANN Nominating Committee to that House for a total of thirteen voting members.

  4. The Nominating Committee reviews applications and selects candidates, taking into account the criteria or guidance provided by the GNSO Council.

  5. The GNSO Council is invited on an annual basis to review the job description and criteria contained in order to better assure that the Nominating Committee selects appointees that is consistent with the intent of the Bylaws in furthering the Council’s roles and responsibilities as the manager of the policy development process of the GNSO.

  6. The GNSO Council has elected to make incremental changes to the job description each year when invited.

  7. Considering that each GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency is represented on the GNSO Council, the role of the Nominating Committee Appointees on the GNSO Council, and the importance of diversity, the Council discussed the need to revise the job description to reflect a preference for appointees that are not currently affiliated with any Stakeholder Group or Constituency, recognizing that this may not always be feasible.

Resolved,
  1. The GNSO Council approves the revised GNSO Councilor job description for use by the 2022 Nominating Committee.

  2. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Secretariat provide the updated job description to the ICANN Org staff supporting the Nominating Committee in a timely manner.

Vote results (motion withdrawn)

20210923-1

Consent Agenda

  • 3.1 - Approval of the Chair for the Accuracy Scoping Team - Michael Palage (SOI)
  • 3.2 - Approval of the updated role description for the GNSO liaison to the GAC
  • 3.3 - Confirmation to appoint Donna Austin as the chair of the EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)
  • 3.4 - Approval of the 2021 Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Slate - In accordance with Section 17.2 (d) of the ICANN Bylaw and per the CSC Charter, the full membership of the CSC must be approved by the GNSO Council. The Council approves the full slate of members and liaisons:           

Members:

Frederico Neves, member re-appointed

Appointing Organization: ccNSO

Term: 2021 – 2023

 

Brett Carr (Vice-Chair) member

Appointing Organization: ccNSO

Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

 

Dmitry Burkov, member re-appointed

Appointing Organization: RySG

Term: 2021 - 2023

 

Gaurav Vedi, member

Appointing Organization: RySG

Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

 

Liaisons:

Holly Raiche, liaison re-appointed

Appointing Organization: ALAC

Term: 2021 - 2023

 

Milton Mueller, liaison re-appointed

Appointing Organization: GNSO (Non-Registry)

Term: 2021 – 2023

 

Lars-Johan Liman, (Chair)

Appointing Organization: RSSAC

Expected Term: 2020 – 2022

 

Laxmi Prasad Yadav

Appointing Organization: GAC

Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

 

Amy Creamer

Appointing Organization: PTI

Term: no term limit

SSAC has declined to appoint a liaison as of the 01 October 2021 slate.

Vote results

20210819-1

Consent Agenda

  • Confirmation of Olga Cavalli to serve as the Chair of the Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement

Vote results

20210819-2

To initiate the EPDP for Specific Curative Rights Mechanisms for IGOs

Submitted by Pam Little

Seconded by John McElwaine

Whereas:

  1. The GNSO Council approved an Addendum to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Policy Development Process (PDP) Charter in January 2020 that created an IGO Work Track to address concerns arising from Recommendation #5 of the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protections PDP that Councilors had expressed during their discussion of the five recommendations in the Final Report;
  2. The GNSO Council had approved the first four recommendations from the IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection PDP, but not Recommendation #5; which the GNSO Council decided to refer to the RPMs PDP, to consider as part of its Phase 2 work;
  3. Taking into account that IGO representatives were eager to start the work and Phase 2 was anticipated to launch shortly after the completion of Phase 1, the GNSO Council launched the IGO Work Track in September 2020, during Phase 1 of the RPMs PDP;
  4. Phase 1 of the RPMs PDP concluded with the GNSO Council's approval of all its final recommendations in January 2021;
  5. Due to concerns raised as to the scope of Phase 2, including from the Phase 1 Working Group's feedback through its self-assessment exercise, the GNSO Council considered it necessary to review and revise the RPMs PDP Charter prior to launching Phase 2;
  6. As Phase 2 will involve the first-ever comprehensive review of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, which has been an ICANN Consensus Policy since 1999, the time and effort involved in rechartering of Phase 2 of the RPMs PDP is likely to be significant;
  7. The GNSO Council believes that the IGO Work Track has made substantial progress in its deliberations and that it is important to maintain the group's momentum, so as to allow the community to attempt to reach consensus on a long-standing issue;
  8. The scope of work for the IGO Work Track focuses on a specific and defined policy issue that has been substantively scoped previously, such that extensive, pertinent information already exists;
  9. The GNSO Council therefore believes that initiating an Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) to enable the policy work to continue without delay is the most appropriate procedural path forward. The GNSO Council recognizes that initiating this EPDP is entirely a procedural action and will not have a material negative impact; and
  10. On 09 August 2021, in accordance with the EPDP Manual, Pam Little submitted an Initiation Request (document updated 18 August 2021) and a draft EPDP Charter to the Council for its consideration.

Resolved:

  1. The GNSO Council hereby approves the Initiation Request for the EPDP and as such initiates the EPDP on Specific Curative Rights Protections for Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs).
  2. The GNSO Council hereby approves the EPDP Charter for Specific Curative Rights Protections for IGOs, which reflects the same scope of work as captured in the IGO Work Track Addendum and thus continues the work of the IGO Work Track, which is hereby disbanded.
  3. The GNSO Council directs the Chair and members of the IGO Work Track to continue its work as the EPDP Team on Specific Curative Rights Protections for IGOs, and to deliver its reports and outcomes in accordance with the EPDP Charter and the work plan that was developed by the IGO Work Track and acknowledged by the Council on 22 April 2021 and amended by a Project Change Request on 22 July 2021.
  4. The GNSO Council directs staff to communicate the results of this vote to the members of the IGO Work Track and all participating Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees and GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies.

Vote results

20210819-3

Approval of the template for the method of the Second Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Effectiveness Review and appointment of GNSO representatives

Submitted by Pam Little

Seconded by Maxim Alzoba

Whereas,

  1. The Customer Standing Committee (CSC) was established as one of the post IANA Transition entities and conducted its first meeting on 6 October 2016.
  2. The ICANN Bylaws, Section 17.3 (b) states, "The effectiveness of the CSC shall be reviewed two years after the first meeting of the CSC; and then every three years thereafter. The method of review will be determined by the ccNSO and GNSO and the findings of the review will be published on the Website."
  3. On 27 June 2018, in the process of adopting the amended CSC Charter as required by the ICANN Bylaws, Section 17.3 (c), the Council resolved that it, "… notes the recommendation in the Final Report that the ccNSO and GNSO Councils conduct an analysis of the requirements of the IANA Naming Function Review and the CSC Effectiveness Review with a view to creating synergies and avoiding overlap, and has appointed two Councilors to conduct the recommended analysis in cooperation with two representatives from the ccNSO."
  4. Donna Austin and Philippe Fouquart, as the two appointed GNSO Councilors, and Debbie Monahan and Martin Boyle from the ccNSO, concluded that the most practical and efficient path forward was for the ccNSO and GNSO to each appoint two members to conduct the CSC Effectiveness Review that will consider the effectiveness of the CSC in performing its responsibilities as outlined in the CSC Charter.
  5. On 27 September 2018, the GNSO Council approved the process for the first Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Effectiveness Review and appointed Donna Austin and Philippe Fouquart to serve as the GNSO representatives on that team.
  6. That review team delivered its Final Report on 5 March 2019, where the team concluded that the CSC is operating effectively against 14 requirements from the CSC's Charter; the GNSO Council approved the Final Report on 13 March 2019.
  7. As per the Bylaws, Section 17.3 (b), the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will need to determine the method for conducting the second CSC Effectiveness Review before 1 October 2021.
  8. The template to conduct the second CSC Effectiveness Review was conditionally approved by the ccNSO Council and was shared with the GNSO Council on 9 August 2021.
  9. The template has been reviewed and non-substantive changes recommended for the purposes of clarity and to make the timeline more achievable.
  10. On 9 August 2021, Donna Austin and Jonathan Robinson were put forward to the GNSO Council as the GNSO appointees to serve on the second CSC Effectiveness Review.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council approves the amended template for conducting the second CSC Effectiveness Review as suggested.
  2. The GNSO Council appoints Donna Austin and Jonathan Robinson as the GNSO Council representatives of the second CSC Effectiveness Review.
  3. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Secretariat notify ICANN Org no later than 30 September 2021 that the GNSO has approved of the method of review and GNSO representatives for the second CSC Effectiveness Review.

Vote results

20210722-1

CONSENT AGENDA

  • Approval of the Chair for the EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names - Edmon Chung (SOI)
  • Acknowledgment of the GNSO Council liaison to EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names - Farrell Folly
  • Motion to adopt the GNSO Review of the GAC ICANN71 Virtual Policy Forum Communiqué for submission to the ICANN Board

    • Submitted by: Tatiana Tropina
    • Seconded by: Pam Little
    • Whereas,
    1. The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting.
    2. The GNSO is responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains.
    3. The GNSO Council has expressed a desire to provide feedback to the ICANN Board on issues in the GAC Communiqué as these relate to generic top-level domains to inform the ICANN Board as well as the broader community of past, present or future gTLD policy activities that may directly or indirectly relate to advice provided by the GAC.
    4. The GNSO Council's review of the GAC Communiqué is intended to further enhance the co-ordination and promote the sharing of information on gTLD related policy activities between the GAC, Board and the GNSO.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Council Review of the ICANN71 GAC Communiqué (see https://gac.icann.org/contentMigrated/icann71-gac-communique) and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Council Review of the ICANN71 GAC Communiqué to the ICANN Board.
  2. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Liaison to the GAC also informs the GAC of the communication between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board.

Vote results

20210722-2

Motion to confirm the formation of and instructions to the Accuracy Scoping Team

Submitted by Pam Little

Seconded by Olga Cavalli

Whereas,

  1. The GNSO Council adopted a proposal on 21 October 2020 which recommended that a Scoping Team addresses the effects of GDPR on Registration Data accuracy requirements and the Whois Accuracy Reporting System (ARS), stating, "a scoping team would be tasked to, 'facilitate community understanding of the issue; assist in scoping and defining the issue; gather support for the request of an Issue Report, and/or; serve as a means to gather additional data and/or information before a request [for an Issue Report] is submitted'.
  2. On 4 November 2020, GNSO SG/Cs as well as ICANN SO/ACs were informed of the Council's intent to form a Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team and were requested to indicate if they would be interested in sending representatives to this effort.
  3. At the same time, the GNSO Council also requested that ICANN org develop a briefing document that outlines both (i) existing accuracy requirements and programs and (ii) the corresponding impact that GDPR has had on implementing / enforcing these requirements and programs. This briefing paper was delivered to the Council in February 2021.
  4. Following the Council discussion of the ICANN org briefing paper in April 2021, Council leadership put together a first proposal outlining possible instructions to the Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team.
  5. As a result of input that was provided by different Council members on the first proposal, the Council decided at its May 2021 meeting to form a small team to further review and revise the instructions to the scoping team.
  6. The small team, consisting of one Council member from each GNSO Stakeholder Group or Constituency, two NomCom appointed Council members and the GNSO Liaison to the GAC (as an observer), submitted its recommendations in relation to the formation as well as the instructions for the Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team to the Council on 9 July 2021 for Council's consideration

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council adopts the Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team – Formation and Instructions
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to request interested SO/AC/SG/Cs to confirm their representatives to the Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team as well as invite the Board and ICANN org to appoint a liaison noting that the first meeting of the Scoping Team is not expected to be scheduled until the EPDP Phase 2A delivers its Final Report.
  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Policy Staff Support Team to launch a call for expressions of interest for candidates to serve as the Chair of the Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team. Council leadership will review the applications received and make its recommendation to the GNSO Council.
  4. The GNSO Council thanks the small team for its efforts.

Vote results

20210616-1

Motion to initiate the GNSO Framework for Continuous Improvement Pilot Project

Submitted by Tatiana Tropina

Seconded by Kurt Pritz

Whereas,

  1. Council leadership started conversations with the GNSO Council and GNSO community, via Stakeholder Group and Constituency Chairs, on how to address several items on the Council's Action Decision Radar (ADR) 0-1 month timeframe dealing with process and procedural improvements such as Accountability Work Stream 2, Accountability and Transparency Review Team 3 and PDP 3.0.
  2. This resulted in a proposed GNSO Framework for Continuous Improvement Oversight and Implementation. Following the circulation of an initial proposal in January 2021, Council leadership solicited feedback via email as well as a dedicated call with SG/C Chairs as well as Council. Taking into account the input received, an updated proposal was circulated to the Council and SG/C Chairs on 26 May 2021 (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2021-May/024730.html).
  3. This updated proposal includes a proposed pilot which allows for a more limited roll out of the Framework from which lessons can be drawn and possible updates can be made, should the Council and GNSO community decide that it is worthwhile to continue.
  4. The Council and SG/C Chairs reviewed this updated proposal.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council initiates the GNSO Framework for Continuous Improvement Pilot as outlined in section 4 of this document where step 4 of Section 4 is replaced with the fourth resolved clause below.
  2. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to circulate the call for volunteers to form the Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement.
  3. Once formed, the GNSO Council expects regular updates from the Chair of the Council Committee to the Council as well as SG/Cs in relation to progress made.
  4. Once the pilot completes, the Council, in close collaboration with SG/Cs as well as the Council Committee and Pilot Task Force, will review the functioning of the Framework and decide whether to continue with the other assignments as outlined in the updated proposal (see section 3), make modifications to the framework and continue with the other assignments, or, identify another path through which the assignments identified are to be addressed.
  5. For the time being, the items that are expected to be addressed as part of the Framework (inlc. WS2, Policy & Implementation, PDP 3.0, Empowered Community, ATRT3, GNSO Review) will be moved to a section in the ADR with no timeframe associated with them as the timing will be determined as a result of the pilot. However, this does not prevent the Council from determining if one or more of these items need to be addressed in a different manner before the pilot concludes, for example, as a result of external factors or changes in the dependencies that were identified (see section 5).

Vote results

20210520-1

CONSENT AGENDA

  • Appointment of the GNSO Council liaison to the System for Standardized Access/Disclosure Operational Design Phase - Janis Karklins

Vote results

20210520-2

Adoption of the GNSO Review of the GAC ICANN70 Virtual Community Forum Communiqué for submission to the ICANN Board

Whereas,

  1. The Governmental Advisory Committee advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting.
  2. The GNSO is responsible for developing and recommending to the ICANN Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains.
  3. The GNSO has expressed a desire to provide feedback to the ICANN Board on issues in the GAC Communiqué as these relate to generic top-level domains to inform the ICANN Board as well as the broader community of past, present or future gTLD policy activities that may directly or indirectly relate to advice provided by the GAC.
  4. The GNSO hopes that the input provided through its review of the GAC Communiqué will further enhance the co-ordination and promote the sharing of information on gTLD related policy activities between the GAC, Board and the GNSO.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Review of the ICANN70 Virtual Community Forum GAC Communiqué and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Review of the ICANN70 Virtual Community Forum GAC Communiqué to the ICANN Board.
  2. The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Council Chair also informs the GAC Chair of the communication between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board.

Vote results

20210520-3

Motion to initiate the Expedited Policy Development Process on Internationalized Domain Names and adoption of the EPDP on IDNs Charter

Whereas,

  1. On 14 March 2019, the ICANN Board approved a set of recommendations developed by ICANN org on how to allocate Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) variant TLD labels. The ICANN Board requested that the GNSO and ccNSO take into account those IDN variant TLD recommendations while developing their respective policies to define and manage IDN variant TLDs for the current TLDs and future TLD applications, while keeping each other informed of the progress in developing the relevant details of their policies and procedures to ensure a consistent solution for IDN variant gTLDs and IDN variant ccTLDs.
  2. On 26 June 2019, the GNSO Council established a Scoping Team to develop recommendations for the GNSO Council's consideration on how to address the IDN variant TLD recommendations, as well as issues in the Final Proposed Draft version 4.0 of Internationalized Domain Name ("IDN") Implementation Guidelines ("IDN Guidelines v. 4.0"), for which the ICANN Board had agreed to the GNSO Council request [gnso.icann.org] to defer its adoption. The Scoping Team met between 15 August 2019 and 12 December 2019.
  3. On 23 January 2020, the GNSO Council discussed the Final Report [gnso.icann.org] from the Scoping Team, which suggested tackling IDN related issues in two tracks: Operational Track and Policy Track. The Policy Track would be tasked to deliberate on: i) the definition and management of IDN variant TLDs, and ii) the change process of the IDN Guidelines and any policy issues related to the IDN Guidelines v. 4.0 identified by the Operational Track Team (consisted of members in the GNSO Contracted Parties House) and agreed upon by the IDN Guidelines Working Group.
  4. On 26 January 2020, the ICANN Board approved the Recommendations for the Technical Utilization of the RZ-LGR on how to employ the RZ-LGR to determine valid IDN TLDs and their variant labels. The ICANN Board requested that the GNSO and ccNSO take into account those RZ-LGR Technical Utilization recommendations while developing their respective policies to define and manage IDN variant TLDs for the current TLDs and future TLD applications.
  5. On 21 October 2020, the GNSO Council agreed to establish a Drafting Team to develop both a draft charter and an Initiation Request for an EPDP on IDNs. The GNSO Council agreed with the Scoping Team's suggestion that an Issue Report is likely not needed in order to initiate the Policy Track work, and an EPDP is the desired approach. The Drafting Team met between 8 December 2020 and 4 May 2021.
  6. On 10 May 2021, the Drafting Team submitted the draft EPDP charter and the Initiation Request for the GNSO Council's consideration.
  7. On 20 May 2021, the Drafting Team Chair provided a briefing to the GNSO Council on the content of the draft charter prior to the Council vote to initiate the EPDP and adopt the charter.

RESOLVED,

  1. The GNSO Council hereby approves the Initiation Request for the EPDP on IDNs and as such initiates the EPDP.
  2. The GNSO Council approves the Charter of the EPDP on IDNs.
  3. The GNSO Council directs staff to:

    1. communicate the results of this motion to the GNSO SG/Cs as well as ICANN SO/ACs and invite them to identify Members for the working group following the working group composition described in the Charter;
    2. communicate the results of this motion to the ICANN Org GDS Team and invite them to identify at least one (1) staff liaison for the working group;
    3. launch a call for expressions of interest seeking interested candidates to Chair the EPDP on IDNs; and
    4. solicit candidates for the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP on IDNs.

Vote results

20210422-1

CONSENT AGENDA

  • Acknowledgment of the GNSO Council liaison to Transfer Policy PDP - Greg Dibiase
  • Approval of the Chair for the Transfer Policy PDP - Roger Carney (SOI)

Vote results

20210422-2

Appointment of a second GNSO representative to the Community Representatives Group (CRG) that will nominate the Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel

Submitted by: Carlton Samuels

Seconded by: Marie Pattullo

Whereas,

  1. The SO/AC Chairs agreed to the formation of a Community Representatives Group (CRG) to select nominees for the Bylaws-mandated Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel.
  2. The GNSO has the opportunity to appoint up to two members to serve on the CRG, but only one application was received by the GNSO in response to initial Expression of Interest process. The sole candidate, Heather Forrest, was considered and recommended by the GNSO Standing Selection Committee and subsequently appointed by the GNSO Council to serve as a GNSO representative to the CRG.
  3. The SG/C Chairs agreed to initiate a second Expression of Interest process to identify an additional GNSO representative to serve on the CRG. The process opened on 8 March 2021.
  4. The GNSO SG/C Chairs and GNSO Council Leadership agreed that the SSC should be deployed to select the GNSO's second representative to the CRG.
  5. The SSC reviewed the three applications received, taking into account the guidance provided by the SG/C Chairs.
  6. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 12 April 2021, by way of submission of the relevant motion.
  7. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO appoints Donna Austin to serve as a second GNSO representative to the Community Representatives Group that will nominate the Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel.
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the SO/AC Chairs and ICANN.
  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the nominated candidate of the Council's decision.
  4. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to those applicants who were not nominated, noting that all three candidates were highly qualified, thanking them for their interest and willingness to step forward for this role, and encouraging them to apply for future opportunities as they arise.

Vote results

20210324-1

Consent agenda

  • Confirmation of the Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of relevant Outputs from the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP.

Vote results

20210324-2

IANA Naming Functions Contract Amendment

Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: Tomslin Samme-Nlar

Whereas,

  1. On 16 September 2018, the first IANA Function Review (IFR) was convened by the ICANN Board, in compliance with Article 18 of the ICANN Bylaws. The IFR Team (IFRT) published its Initial Report for public comment on 08 October 2020.
  2. The IFRT developed four recommendations, with Recommendation 4 suggesting an amendment to the IANA Naming Function Contract. The IFRT followed the Bylaws required steps regarding contract amendment recommendations found in Section 18.6, which include consultation with the ICANN Board, consultation with the Customer Standing Committee, conducting a public input session for ccTLD and gTLD registry operators, and to conduct a public comment proceeding on the amendment.
  3. Pursuant to the ICANN Bylaws Section 18.6 (b)(i), IFR Recommendations requiring a contract amendment must be approved by a supermajority vote of the ccNSO Council and GNSO Councils.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council approves Recommendation 4 contained in the IFR Final Report, which recommends that Article VII, Section 7.1 (a) of the IANA Naming Function contract be amended to remove this statement, "The relevant policies under which the changes are made shall be noted within each monthly report" be removed from the IANA Naming Function contract.
  2. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to communicate this decision to the Co-Chairs of the IFRT and relevant ICANN staff accordingly.

Vote results

20210324-3

Approval of the Charter for the Working Group to Conduct a Policy Development Process to Review the Transfer Policy

Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: Maxim Alzoba

Whereas,

  1. On 12 January 2021, the GNSO Council received the Final Issue Report on a Policy Development Process (PDP) to Review the Transfer Policy. The Final Issue Report included a Draft Charter that incorporated a number of PDP 3.0 Improvements. It also sets out proposed scope of work and recommended a working group structure based on a "representative model".
  2. On 8 February, the GNSO Chair sought input from the chairs of all ICANN Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies regarding the proposed membership model, the number of representatives from their community group and timing for launch the proposed PDP.
  3. On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council passed a resolution to initiate a two-phased PDP to Review the Transfer Policy which will determine if changes to the policy are needed to improve the ease, security, and efficacy of inter-registrar and inter-registrant transfers. During the 18 February 2021 meeting, the Council discussed the Draft Charter and decided to form a small group of Councilors to finalize the Charter, with a focus on the working group membership model and composition.
  4. On 24 February 2021 and 4 March 2021, the Council small team discussed the input received from community groups and considerations such as expertise and technical knowledge of the Transfer Policy, interest in the topic and impact of PDP outcome.
  5. On 12 March 2021, the Council small group completed its work and submitted a final version of the Charter of the PDP to Review the Transfer Policy to the full GNSO Council.

RESOLVED:

  1. The GNSO Council approves the Charter of the PDP to Review the Transfer Policy.
  2. The GNSO Council directs staff to: (a) communicate the results of this motion to the GNSO SG/Cs as well as ICANN SO/ACs and invite them to identify members and alternates for the working group following the working group composition described in the Charter; (b) initiate a call for expressions of interest seeking interested candidates to chair the PDP to Review the Transfer Policy.

Vote results

20210218-1

Consent agenda

  • Confirmation of Philippe Fouquart to serve as the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP 2A.
  • Non-objection from the Council for the EPDP Team to appoint a non-EPDP Team member as vice-chair.
  • Confirmation of the Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of all recommendations from the Phase 1 Final Report of the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in All gTLDs PDP.

Vote results

20210218-2

Initiation of a Policy Development Process to Review the Transfer Policy

Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: Carlton Samuels

Whereas,

  1. The GNSO Council issued a call for volunteers for a Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team on October 3, 2019. The Scoping Team was tasked with providing recommendations on the approach to a potential review and future policy work related to the Transfer Policy; composition of the review team or PDP working group; and scope of the review;
  2. The Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team delivered a Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper on April 6, 2020 in which it recommended the GNSO Council instruct ICANN Policy staff to draft a Preliminary Issue Report, outlining, et., the issues described within the Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper;
  3. On 24 June 2020 the GNSO Council requested preparation of a Preliminary Issue Report, for delivery as expeditiously as possible, on the issues identified in the Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper, to assist in determining whether a PDP or series of PDPs should be initiated regarding changes to the Transfer Policy;
  4. On 20 August 2020, the GNSO Council agreed to extend the timeline for delivery of the Issue Report to 10 October 2020;
  5. ICANN staff published the Preliminary Issue Report on a Policy Development Process to Review the Transfer Policy for public comment on 12 October 2020, with the public comment forum closing on 30 November 2020;
  6. ICANN staff have reviewed the public comments received, published a Report of Public Comments on 14 December 2020 and updated the Issue Report accordingly;
  7. The Final Issue Report on a Policy Development Process to Review the Transfer Policy was delivered to the GNSO Council on 12 January 2021;
  8. The Final Issue Report includes a recommendation that the GNSO Council proceed with a two-phased Policy Development Process (PDP) that will address the following topic areas in sequence:
    • Phase 1(a): Form of Authorization (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 FOA issues) and AuthInfo Codes
    • Phase 1(b): Change of Registrant (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 Change of Registrant issues)
    • Phase 2: Transfer Emergency Action Contact and reversing inter-registrar transfers, Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 TDRP issues), NACKing transfers, ICANN-approved transfers
  9. The General Counsel of ICANN has indicated that the topics recommended for review are properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process and the GNSO.

RESOLVED:

  1. The GNSO Council hereby initiates a two-phased PDP to Review the Transfer Policy which will determine if changes to the policy are needed to improve the ease, security, and efficacy of inter-registrar and inter-registrant transfers.
  2. The GNSO Council requests that the PDP Working Group be convened as soon as possible after the adoption of the PDP Working Group Charter in order to fulfill the requirements of this PDP.

Vote results

20210218-3

Adoption of the Policy Development Process on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report

Submitted by: Flip Petillion

Seconded by: Kurt Pritz

WHEREAS

  1. On 17 December 2015 the GNSO Council resolved to initiate a PDP to consider and analyze issues discussed in the Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro PDP) to determine whether changes or adjustments to the existing policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains from 08 August 2007 are needed.
  2. On 21 January 2016 the GNSO Council approved the Charter for the SubPro PDP and directed ICANN staff to issue a call for volunteers for the SubPro PDP Working Group.
  3. After initiating a call for community comment in June of 2016 (Community Comment 1), the SubPro PDP divided its work into four Work Tracks culminating in a second call for community comment (Community Comment 2) in March of 2017, that provided an insight into the work of each of the initial four Work Tracks, and asked a series of questions of the community for further consideration.
  4. In November of 2017, a fifth Work Track (WT5) was created solely for the purpose of examining the issues related to Geographic Names as the Top Level. In recognition of the broad interest in the topic and to encourage participation from the ICANN community, it was set up to include four WT5 leaders, one each from the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC and At-Large.
  5. The SubPro PDP has followed the prescribed PDP steps as stated in the Bylaws, including the publication of the following Reports for public comment:
    1. an Initial Report on 08 July 2018 for public comment.
    2. a Supplemental Initial Report on 30 October 2018, covering certain issues not included in the Initial Report.
    3. a Supplemental Initial Report on Geographic Names at the Top Level on 5 December 2018.
    4. a Draft Final Report on 20 August 2020.
  6. On 18 January 2021, the SubPro PDP Working Group submitted its Final Report to the Council for its consideration.
  7. On 21 January 2021, the GNSO Council received a high-level briefing of the Final Report by the GNSO Council Liaison to the SubPro PDP Working Group.
  8. On 28 January 2021, the GNSO Council Liaison to the SubPro PDP Working Group and its Co-Chairs held a webinar, directed at the GNSO Council, to discuss the Final Report's 41 Topics, which included hundreds of Affirmations, Recommendations and Implementation Guidance (Collectively referred to as "Outputs") in more detail.
  9. Each of the Outputs in the following topics obtained a Full Consensus designation (Topics 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40).
  10. Each of the following topics received an overall designation of Consensus, with all of the Outputs obtaining at least a Consensus designation (Topics 2, 3, 4, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 21, 24, 27, 29, 30, 34, and 41).
  11. One Topic obtained a Strong Support but Significant Opposition designation (#35); However, within that one Topic, three of the five Outputs obtained a Consensus designation, and two of the five Outputs, Recommendations 35.2 and 35.4, obtained the designation Strong Support but Significant Opposition.
  12. While not seeking to affirm that the status quo prevails in any particular instance, the GNSO Council notes that the Working Group operated under the assumption that, in the event the Working Group was unable to reach consensus in recommending an alternate course of action, the "status quo" should remain in place as a default position, with the status quo consisting of the 2007 policy, the final Applicant Guidebook, and any implementation elements that were put into practice in the 2012 application round.
  13. The GNSO Council notes that Topic 23: Closed Generics was identified as an Output category of No Agreement, which did achieve Full Consensus. However, the GNSO Council believes No Agreement is functionally equivalent to the designation of Divergence as detailed in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, meaning that the Working Group was unable to reach consensus in recommending an alternate course of action. The GNSO Council further notes that especially as it relates to Topic 23: Closed Generics, there were diverging interpretations within the Working Group of what constitutes the "status quo".
  14. Given the large number of topics and the interdependency of many of the subjects, the SubPro PDP Working Group recommends that all Outputs be considered as one package by the GNSO Council and subsequently the ICANN Board, notwithstanding any Outputs that did not achieve Consensus or Full Consensus.

RESOLVED

  1. The GNSO Council approves, and recommends that the ICANN Board adopt, the Affirmations, Recommendations, and Implementation Guidance (Collectively referred to as "Outputs") that were determined to have received either Full Consensus or Consensus designations as documented in the SubPro PDP Working Group's Final Report
  2. Recognizing that nearly a decade has passed since the opening of the 2012 round of new gTLDs, the GNSO Council requests that the ICANN Board consider and direct the implementation of the Outputs adopted by the GNSO Council without waiting for any other proposed or ongoing policy work unspecific to New gTLD Subsequent Procedures to conclude, while acknowledging the importance of such work.
  3. Further, the GNSO Council requests that the ICANN Board initiate an Operational Design Phase on the Final Report of the SubPro Working Group and its Outputs as soon as possible, to perform an assessment of GNSO Council recommendations in order to provide the Board with relevant operational information to facilitate the Board's determination, in accordance with the Bylaws, on the impact of the operational impact of the implementation of the recommendations, including whether the recommendations are in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN.
  4. The GNSO Council requests that the ICANN Org convene an Implementation Review Team to work on the implementation of these Outputs. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with assisting ICANN org in developing the implementation details for the New gTLD Program, evaluating the proposed implementation of the Outputs as approved by the Board, and working with ICANN staff to ensure that the resultant implementation conforms to the intent of the approved Outputs. The Implementation Review Team shall operate in accordance with the Implementation Review Team Principles and Guidance approved by the GNSO Council in June 2015.
  5. The GNSO Council extends its sincere appreciation to the Co-Chairs, Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Jeffrey Neuman, as well as past Co-Chair Avri Doria, the SubPro PDP Work Track leaders, the SubPro Working Group members and support staff of the SubPro PDP for their tireless efforts these past five years to deliver this Final Report.

Vote results

20210121-1

CONSENT AGENDA

Motion - Appointment of a GNSO Non-Registry Liaison to the Customer Standing Committee

Submitted by: Carlton Samuels

Seconded by: Tatiana Tropina

Whereas,

  1. The existing GNSO Non-Registry Liaison to the Customer Standing Committee James Gannon was nominated to serve a two-year term beginning 1 October 2019.
  2. The Liaison stepped down from the role as of ICANN69 due to his appointment to the PTI Board.
  3. On 9 November 2020, the GNSO launched an Expression of Interest (EOI) process via email to the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies to solicit volunteers to serve in the Liaison role for the remainder of the current term.
  4. The GNSO Council tasked the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) with reviewing applications and recommending one individual for the GNSO to appoint.
  5. The SSC reviewed the one application received, taking into account the criteria outlined in the EOI announcement.
  6. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 11 January 2021, by way of submission of the relevant motion.
  7. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO appoints Milton Mueller to serve as GNSO Non-Registry Liaison to the Customer Standing Committee.
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to staff supporting the Customer Standing Committee.
  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the appointed candidate that he has been selected.

Vote results

 

Motion - Nomination of a Mentor for the ICANN Fellowship Program

Submitted by: Carlton Samuels

Seconded by: Tatiana Tropina

Whereas,

  1. On 16 November 2020, the ICANN Fellowship Program invited ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees to nominate one individual each (total of 7) to serve in the capacity of Fellowship Program mentor for three consecutive ICANN meetings, beginning with ICANN72 (see https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-11-16-en)
  2. On 3 December 2020, the GNSO launched an Expression of Interest (EOI) process to solicit volunteers for the GNSO-nominated mentor position (seehttps://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03dec20-en.htm).
  3. The GNSO Council tasked the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) with reviewing applications and recommending one individual for the GNSO to nominate.
  4. The SSC reviewed the applications received, taking into account the criteria outlined in the EOI announcement.
  5. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 11 January 2021, by way of submission of the relevant motion.
  6. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO nominates Farell Folly to serve as a ICANN Fellowship Program mentor for three consecutive ICANN meetings, beginning with ICANN72.
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to staff supporting the ICANN Fellowship Program.
  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the nominated candidate that he or she has been selected.
  4. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to those applicants who were not nominated, thanking them for their interest and encouraging them to apply for future opportunities as they arise.

Vote results

 

Motion - Appointment of a GNSO Representative to the Community Representatives Group that will nominate the Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel.

Submitted by: Carlton Samuels

Seconded by: Tatiana Tropina

Whereas,

  1. The SO/AC Chairs have agreed to the formation of a Community Representatives Group to select nominees for the Bylaws-mandated Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel.
  2. On 18 November 2020, ICANN, in consultation with the SO/ACs, opened an Expression of Interest process to solicit volunteers for the Community Representatives Group (https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-11-18-en) with the understanding that Expressions of Interest would be reviewed by the specific SO/ACwhose endorsement was requested by the applicant.
  3. The GNSO SG/C Chairs and GNSO Council Leadership agreed that the SSC should be deployed to select the GNSO's Representative(s) to the Community Representatives Group.
  4. The SG/C Chairs provided written guidance for the SSC to support the selection process.
  5. The SSC reviewed the application received, taking into account the guidance provided by the SG/C Chairs.
  6. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 11 January 2021, by way of submission of the relevant motion.
  7. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO appoints Heather Forrest to serve as a GNSO Representative to the Community Representatives Group that will nominate the Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel.
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to the SO/AC Chairs and ICANN.
  3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the nominated candidate of the Council's decision.

Vote results

20210121-2

Motion - GNSO Council Input on Recommendation 7 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Phase 1 Final Report and Thick Whois Transition Policy (Deferred from the 17 December 2020 Meeting)

Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: John McElwaine

WHEREAS

  1. The Thick RDDS (Whois) Transition Policy for .COM, .NET and .JOBS (Thick Whois Transition Policy) is an ICANN consensus policy resulting from the implementation of the policy recommendations in the Final Report on the Thick WHOIS Policy Development Process ("Thick Whois PDP").
  2. Section 16 of ANNEX 2: Policy Development Process Manual to the GNSO Operating Procedures v3.5 provides: "Approved GNSO Council policies that have been adopted by the ICANN Board and have been implemented by ICANN Staff may only be amended by the initiation of a new PDP on the issue."
  3. On 17 May 2018, the ICANN Board adopted the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data ("Temporary Specification").
  4. On 19 July 2018, the GNSO Council initiated an Expedited Policy Development Process ("EPDP") and chartered the EPDP on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team to determine if the Temporary Specification should become an ICANN consensus policy as is, or with modifications (emphasis added).
  5. Recommendation #7 in the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report ("Final Report") makes transfer of registrant contact information optional, depending on whether the registry operator in question has an appropriate legal basis to require the data and a data processing agreement is in place.
  6. To the extent the Thick Whois Transition Policy is modified by Recommendation #7, the EPDP Team recommends the Thick Whois Transition Policy and other impacted consensus policies be updated to ensure consistency (see Recommendation #27 of the Final Report).
  7. Recommendation #7 was developed in response to the questions in Section C of the EPDP Charter, with a consensus designation of "Full Consensus / Consensus" (see Annex E of the Final Report).
  8. On 4 March 2019, the GNSO Council adopted all the policy recommendations in the Final Report, including Recommendation #7, with the required GNSO Supermajority.
  9. On 15 May 2019, the ICANN Board passed a resolution adopting most of the policy recommendations contained in the Final Report, including Recommendation #7 and noting Recommendation #7 does not repeal or overturn the Thick WHOIS Policy [sic] and directed "ICANN org to work with the Implementation Review Team to examine and transparently report on the extent to which these Recommendations require modification of existing Consensus Policies, including the Thick WHOIS Transition Policy".
  10. Section 7 of Annex A-1 to the ICANN Bylaws provides: "Upon a final decision of the Board adopting the EPDP recommendations, the Board shall, as appropriate, give authorization or direction to ICANN staff to implement the EPDP Recommendations. If deemed necessary, the Board shall direct ICANN staff to work with the GNSO Council to create a guidance implementation plan, based upon the guidance recommendations identified in the Final EPDP Recommendation(s) Report."
  11. Section III. A of the Consensus Policy Implementation Framework provides: The GNSO Council may continue to provide input on the implementation of a policy, for example, if the GNSO Council believes that the implementation is inconsistent with the policy [recommendation]".

RESOLVED

  1. The GNSO Council confirms that the EPDP had the mandate to modify the Thick Whois Transition Policy under the EPDP
  2. The GNSO Council determines that in light of the EPDP being chartered by the GNSO Council, among other things, to address the questions in Part 2(c) under "Mission and Scope" to specifically address the transfer of data from registrar to registry, the resulting recommendation #7 appropriately fulfills this purpose. Furthermore, the requirement of Section 16 of the PDP Manual is deemed satisfied for the purpose of amending the Thick Whois Transition Policy.
  3. The GNSO Council determines, notwithstanding the absence of a clear statement, the intent of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation #7 to modify the Thick Whois Transition Policy is implied, taking into account the history, background, context and purpose of the EPDP, the specific language of Recommendation #7 and the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report in its entirety.
  4. The GNSO Council determines that the Recommendation #7 language, "must be transferred from registrar to registry provided an appropriate legal basis exists and data processing agreement is in place" should be included in the Registration Data Policy in order to conform with the intent of the EPDP Phase 1 Team's policy recommendation and the subsequent GNSO Council adoption ("GNSO Council Input").
  5. The GNSO Council instructs the Council's Liaison to communicate the GNSO Council Input to the Registration Data Policy Implementation Review Team pursuant to Section III.A of the Consensus Policy Implementation Framework.
  6. 6. The GNSO Council shall communicate the GNSO Council Input to the ICANN Board of Directors.

RATIONALE

The Thick Whois PDP Final Report anticipated that its recommendations might be affected by evolving privacy regulation. In particular, Recommendation 3 states,

"As part of the implementation process a legal review of law applicable to the transition of data from a thin to thick model … due consideration is given to potential privacy issues that may arise from the discussions on the transition from thin to thick Whois … Should any privacy issues emerge from these transition discussions that were not anticipated by the WG and which would require additional policy consideration, the Implementation Review Team is expected to notify the GNSO Council of these so that appropriate action can be taken."

In addition, the implementation advice ("Other Observations") mentions in part,

"...the increasing number of data protection and privacy laws and regulations around the world, as well as specific Whois-related concerns raised by the public. While recognizing that this exceeds the scope of our remit, we suggest that, as part of the development of the registration data directory system model currently in process, ICANN ensure that the ramifications of data protection and privacy laws and regulations with respect to Whois requirements be examined thoroughly."

In effect, the Temporary Specification and the EPDP accomplished the legal review of the ramifications of data protection laws required by Recommendation 3 of the Thick Whois PDP Final Report.

The requirements set out in the Temporary Specification supersede and replace the contractual requirements in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement and the Registry Agreements, which incorporate by reference all ICANN consensus policies.

There is a conflict between the data processing principles under the Temporary Specification and the requirements under existing gTLD Registry Agreements as well as the Thick Whois Transition Policy. In other words, the Thick Whois Transition Policy was modified by the Temporary Specification and further modified by Recommendation #7 in the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report, as the EPDP Team was mandated to do.

While there is no explicit reference to the Thick Whois Transition Policy, this consensus policy and others that are affected by the GDPR and other relevant data privacy laws fell squarely within the scope of the Temporary Specification and hence they are also within the scope of the EPDP. The EPDP Charter states:

"Mission and Scope

This EPDP Team is being chartered to determine if the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data should become an ICANN Consensus Policy, as is or with modifications, while complying with the GDPR and other relevant privacy and data protection law. As part of this determination, the EPDP Team is, at a minimum, expected to consider the following elements of the Temporary Specification and answer the following charter questions. The EPDP Team shall consider what subsidiary recommendations it might make for future work by the GNSO which might be necessary to ensure relevant Consensus Policies, including those related to registration data, are reassessed to become consistent with applicable law."

Specifically, Section C of the EPDP Charter contains a set of questions regarding "transfer of data from registrar to registry":

c1) What data should registrars be required to transfer to the registry?

c2) What data is required to fulfill the purpose of a registry registering and resolving a domain name?

c3) What data is transferred to the registry because it is necessary to deliver the service of fulfilling a domain registration versus other legitimate purposes as outlined in part (a) above?

c4) Is there a legal reason why registrars should not be required to transfer data to the registries, in accordance with previous consensus policy on this point?

c5) Should registries have the option to require contact data or not?

c6) Is there a valid purpose for the registrant contact data to be transferred to the registry, or should it continue to reside at the registrar?

While the Final Report does not contain express language that the policy recommendations are intended to supersede the requirements in the existing ICANN consensus policies, in this case, the Thick Whois Transition Policy, such intent is implied (i.e., it goes without saying in light of the history, background, context and purpose of the EPDP).

The EPDP was conducted in an open and transparent manner with representatives from all GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, as well as some ICANN Advisory Committees. As such, Recommendation #7 cannot be considered to be a "shadow repeal" of the Thick Whois Transition Policy.

The recommendations contained in the Thick WHOIS PDP Final Report anticipated that the implementation of those recommendations might be affected by new privacy regulations and the GNSO should address such an occurrence. Therefore, while there is no "clear statement in new consensus policy recommendations that the new policy is intended to supersede (in whole or part) requirements in existing consensus policies," claiming otherwise ignores the history, background, context, purpose of the EPDP as well as the Thick Whois PDP Final Report itself.

The intent and meaning of Recommendation #7 is clear. It is the role of the Implementation Review Team (IRT) to ensure that the implementation of Recommendation #7 conforms to the intent of the policy recommendation. The IRT is not a forum for opening or revisiting policy discussions (see III.A and III.B, Implementation Review Team (IRT) Principles and Guidelines https://www.icann.org/resources/files/1201611-2016-08-23-en).

The Policy Development Process Manual makes clear that "Approved GNSO Council policies that have been adopted by the ICANN Board and have been implemented by ICANN Staff may only be amended by the initiation of a new PDP on the issue." It can therefore be concluded that where there is a conflict between an existing consensus policy and subsequent policy recommendation(s) on the same subject matter, the newer policy recommendation prevails. While the EPDP was scoped differently and under different circumstances than the Thick Whois PDP, it is undeniable that the two policy development processes overlapped in covering the same issue of transfer of Registration Data from registrar to registry, and therefore, the IRT should implement Recommendation #7 as written and intended.

Vote results

20210121-3

Motion - Approve the Recommendations from the Phase 1 Final Report of the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) in All gTLDs, covering RPMs applicable to gTLDs launched under the 2012 New gTLD Program.

Submitted by: John McElwaine

Seconded by: Maxim Alzoba

WHEREAS:

  1. On 18 February 2016, the GNSO Council resolved to initiate a two-phased Policy Development Process (PDP), to review all existing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs in all gTLDs.
  2. On 9 March 2016, the GNSO Council approved the PDP Charter, thereby initiating Phase One of the PDP that focused on the RPMs developed for the 2012 New gTLD Program.
  3. The PDP Working Group has followed all the necessary steps and processes required by the ICANN Bylaws, the GNSO PDP Manual and the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, including the publication of an Initial Report for public comment (on 18 March 2020) and consideration of the public comments received thereto.
  4. On 24 November 2020, the PDP Working Group submitted its Final Report to the GNSO Council for its review and action.
  5. The PDP Working Group has reached Full Consensus for thirty-four (34) out of the thirty-five (35) final recommendations documented in the Final Report, and Consensus for the remaining one (1) final recommendation (concerning Final Recommendation #1 for the Trademark Clearinghouse).

RESOLVED:

  1. The GNSO Council approves, and recommends that the ICANN Board adopt, all thirty-five (35) final PDP recommendations as documented in the PDP Working Group's Final Report.
  2. Should the PDP recommendations be adopted by the ICANN Board, the GNSO Council requests that ICANN org convene an RPM Implementation Review Team, to assist ICANN org in developing the implementation details for the PDP recommendations and ensure that the resultant implementation conforms to the intent of the approved recommendations. The Implementation Review Team shall operate in accordance with the Implementation Review Team Principles and Guidance approved by the GNSO Council in June 2015.
  3. The GNSO Council thanks all the various Co-Chairs and members of the PDP Working Group for their commitment and hard work in completing Phase One of this PDP.

Vote results

20201217-1

Consent agenda

3.1 - Approval of SSC Leadership for 2020-2021: Carlton Samuels, Chair and Sophie Hey, Vice-Chair

3.2 - Approval of Heather Forrest to serve an additional term as GNSO nominated member of the Fellowship Selection Committee

3.3 - Approval of Keith Drazek to serve as EPDP 2A Chair

3.4 - Approval of Chris Disspain to serve as IGO Curative Rights Work Track Chair

3.5 - Confirmation of Council liaisons to respective efforts:

  • All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs / IGO Curative Rights Work Track - John McElwaine
  • New gTLD Subsequent Procedures - Flip Petillion
  • EPDP Phase 2 - Olga Cavalli
  • EPDP Phase 2A - TBD
  • Standing Committee on Budget & Operations (SCBO) - Philippe Fouquart (ex officio)
  • Standing Selection Committee (SSC) - Tatiana Tropina (ex officio)
  • IRT: EPDP Phase 1 - Sebastien Ducos
  • IRT: Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Recommendations (PPSAI) IRT - TBD (paused)
  • IRT: Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information (T/T) - Maxim Alzoba (paused)
  • GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO - Sebastien Ducos
  • GNSO Council liaison to the GAC - Jeff Neuman (already approved but included for completeness)

Vote results

20201119

Consent Agenda

3.1 - Action Decision Radar - After discussing on the October 2020 meeting, Council to approve delay for the request for the Policy Status Report (PSR) for the Expired Domain Deletion Policy and the Expired Registration Recovery Policy. For clarity, delay should be considered to mean that while the Council recognizes the importance of the PSR for these consensus policies, they do not need to be at the top of the queue.

3.2 - Motion for the confirmation of GNSO representative to the Empowered Community Administration

Motion - Confirmation of GNSO Representative to the Empowered Community Administration

Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: Tatiana Tropina

Whereas,

  1. The GNSO Council confirmed in October 2020 that the GNSO Chair (currently Philippe Fouquart) will represent the GNSO as the Decisional Participant on the Empowered Community (EC) Administration on an interim basis.
  2. The GNSO Council leadership team subsequently met to agree who from the Council leadership should perform the role of GNSO representative to the Empowered Community Administration and communicated this decision to the Council mailing list on 8 November 2020.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council hereby confirms that Philippe Fouquart, GNSO Chair will represent the GNSO as the Decisional Participant on the Empowered Community Administration until the end of his term at ICANN72.
  2. The GNSO representative shall act solely as directed by the GNSO Council in accordance with the ICANN Bylaws and other related GNSO Operating Procedures.
  3. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to communicate this decision to the ICANN Secretary which will serve as the required written certification from the GNSO Chair designating the individual who shall represent the Decisional Participant on the EC Administration

Vote results

20201021

Consent Agenda

3.1 - Action Decision Radar - Next Steps for WHOIS Conflicts Procedure Implementation Advisory Group

The GNSO Council has considered the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined in the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure IAG (WHOIS IAG) Small Team's proposal. The proposal outlines recommended next steps to consider with respect to modifying the implementation of the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure, in light of public comments received and changes to data protection law that may have affected the implementation of the Procedure. Specifically, the GNSO Council requests:

  1. ICANN org, in consultation with contracted parties, to draft a proposal for a modification to the existing Procedure based on its past experience with both the WHOIS Conflicts Procedure and the registrar data retention waiver process. In formulating the draft proposal, the GNSO Council recommends that ICANN org consider changes to data protection law that may have affected the previous implementation of this Procedure in light of the contractual requirements, e.g., the General Data Protection Regulation. For example, should the identification of a new trigger to activate the procedure be considered given potential financial penalties under GDPR?
  2. Following receipt of the proposal from ICANN org, the GNSO Council will consider the proposal and assess next steps, including seeking input from the community, if appropriate, given the substance of the proposal. Following the GNSO Council's consideration, the GNSO Council may choose to adopt the proposal.
  3. If the GNSO Council does not deem the proposal appropriate:
    1. the GNSO Council will recommend a small group of Council volunteers to review the WHOIS IAG draft charter and confirm it is still fit for purpose; and
    2. Following confirmation of the Charter by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council recommends launching the call for volunteers for the WHOIS IAG, taking into consideration the GNSO Council's upcoming workload. For example, the call for volunteers may need to be postponed if no community bandwidth is available to immediately consider the issues. In the meantime, ICANN org, in conjunction with the EPDP Phase 1 IRT, will need to update relevant terminology pursuant to EPDP Phase 1, Rec. 27.
  4. Should the GNSO Council consider the outcome developed from the WHOIS IAG unacceptable, the GNSO Council will consider initiating an EPDP to either change or repeal the Consensus Policy.

3.2 - Action Decision Radar - Per the rationale circulated on 11 October 2020, Council agrees to launch a call for volunteers for a small team to develop both a draft charter and an EPDP scoping document for the IDN Policy Track 2.

3.3 - Following the GNSO Council's consideration of the proposed immediate actions and subsequent steps as outlined here, the GNSO Council directs:

EPDP Phase 2a – Legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts

  1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicate to the groups that have appointed members to the EPDP Team that the Council is expected to instruct the EPDP Team to further consider the topics of legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts per the instructions above, as well as the expected timeframe, provided herein for reference, "[a]t the latest 3 months after reconvening, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will report back to the GNSO Council on the status of deliberations. Based on this report, which is expected to include an update on progress made and the expected likelihood of consensus recommendations, the GNSO Council will decide on next steps, which could include providing additional time for the EPDP to finalize its recommendations or termination of the EPDP if it is clear that no progress is being made or consensus is unlikely). Request groups to:
    1. Commence process of confirming members availability and/or re- appointing members to work on these topics. Proposed deadline: 15 November.
    2. Start developing proposals to address these topics, factoring in deliberations to date, that will allow the EPDP Team to kickstart deliberations on these topics when it reconvenes."
  2. The Council leadership to initiate an Expression of Interest Process to identify a new Chair.

    The EPDP Team shall recommence its deliberations upon selection and confirmation of a new Chair; however, should no suitable candidates be found or should the appointment process require significant time, Council leadership will inform the Council accordingly and recommend commencement of deliberations under the leadership of the GNSO Council liaison to the EPDP Team.

Accuracy:

  1. The GNSO Policy Support Team communicates to GNSO SG/Cs, as well as ICANN Advisory Committees that have expressed an interest in the topic of accuracy, the intent of the GNSO Council to launch a scoping team on this topic. Request groups to:
    1. Start thinking about members that have relevant knowledge and expertise that should join this effort once the scoping team launches.
    2. Start compiling relevant information and suggestions that would allow kickstarting the discussions on 1. and 2. once the scoping team is formed (see here for resources already identified).
  2. Council leadership to request ICANN Org to develop a briefing document that outlines both (i) existing accuracy requirements and programs and (ii) the corresponding impact that GDPR has had on implementing / enforcing these requirements and programs. The document, once delivered, will be provided to the scoping team to inform its deliberations.
  3. GNSO Council to consider in the context of the Council Action / Decision Radar, the appropriate starting time for this effort, factoring in other projects that are in the pipeline.

3.4 - Confirmation of the Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of recommendations 1-22 contained in the Final Report from the EPDP Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data – Phase 2.

3.5 - Appointment of the GNSO Liaison to the Governmental Advisory Committee (motion)

Vote results

20200924-1

Consent Agenda

  • 3.1 - Action Decision Radar decision - In respect of Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report and in accordance with the Addendum[gnso.icann.org] to the RPMs Charter adopted by the Council on 23 January 2020, the Council shall initiate both the Expressions of Interest process to identify a single, qualified Work Track Chair and issue a call for Members and Observers to join the IGO Work Track
  • 3.2 - Approval of the 2020 Customer Standing Committee (CSC) Slate - In accordance with Section 17.2 (d) of the ICANN Bylaw and per the CSC Charter, the full membership of the CSC must be approved by the GNSO Council. The Council approves the full slate of members and liaisons, noting that the SSAC has declined to appoint a liaison:

Members:

Alejandra Reynoso (LAC)
Appointing Organization: ccNSO
Term: 2019 - 2021

Brett Carr (Vice-Chair) (EU) re-appointed
Appointing Organization: ccNSO
Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

Dmitry Burkov (EU)
Appointing Organization: RySG
Term: 2019 - 2021

Gaurav Vedi (NA) re-appointed
Appointing Organization: RySG
Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

Liaisons:

Lars-Johan Liman, (Chair) re-appointed
Appointing Organization: RSSAC
Expected Term: 2020 – 2022

Laxmi Prasad Yadav
Appointing Organization: GAC
Expected Term: 2020 - 2022

Holly Raiche
Appointing Organization: ALAC
Term: 2019 - 2021

James Gannon
Appointing Organization: GNSO (Non-Registry)
Term: 2019 - 2021

Naela Sarras
Appointing Organization: PTI
Term: no term limit

Vote results

20200924-2

Adoption of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2 Final Report and Recommendations

Submitted by Rafik Dammak

Seconded by Michele Neylon

WHEREAS

  1. On 17 May 2018, the ICANN Board adopted the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data ("Temporary Specification") pursuant to the procedures in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement concerning the establishment of Temporary Policies;
  2. Following the adoption of the Temporary Specification, and per the procedure for Temporary Policies as outlined in the Registry Agreement and Registrar Accreditation Agreement, a Consensus Policy development process as set forth in ICANN's Bylaws needs to be initiated immediately and completed within a one-year time period from the implementation effective date (25 May 2018) of the Temporary Specification;
  3. The GNSO Council has had a number of discussions about next steps to clarify issues around scope, timing and expectations, including a meeting between the GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Chairs on 21 May 2018, the Council meeting on 24 May 2018, a meeting between the ICANN Board and the GNSO Council on 5 June 2018and an extraordinary GNSO Council meeting on 12 June 2018;
  4. Subsequently, the GNSO Council agreed to form a drafting team, consisting of Council leadership and interested Council members, to develop the EPDP Initiation Request and EPDP Team Charter. The drafting team submitted the proposed EPDP Initiation Request and EPDP Team Charter to the GNSO Council on 19 July 2018;
  5. The GNSO Council approved the EPDP Initiation Request (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-gtld-rd-epdp-initiation-request-19jul18-en.pdf) and the EPDP Team Charter (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/temp-spec-gtld-rd-epdp-19jul18-en.pdf) on 19 July 2018;
  6. The EPDP Team divided the work in two phases; Phase 1 completed with the adoption of the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report on 4 March 2019, at which point the GNSO Council indicated its non-objection, as required per the EPDP Team Charter, for the EPDP Team to commence work on a System for Standardized Access/Disclosure to Non-Public Registration Data ("SSAD") as well as other topics identified in Phase 2 of the Charter and/or carried over from Phase 1 (priority 2 items);
  7. The EPDP Team commenced its deliberations on Phase 2 on 2 May 2019 with the development of its workplan (see https://community.icann.org/x/6BdIBg);
  8. The EPDP has followed the prescribed EPDP steps as stated in the Bylaws, including the publication of an Initial Report on 7 February 2020 for public comment (seehttps://www.icann.org/public-comments/epdp-phase-2-initial-2020-02-07-en) as well as an addendum to the Initial Report on 26 March 2020 (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/epdp-phase-2-addendum-2020-03-26-en, resulting in a Final Report delivered on 31 July 2020 with an updated version containing all minority statements submitted on 26 August 2020;
  9. Eleven (11) recommendations obtained a full consensus designation (#1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 21); Three (3) recommendations obtained a consensus designation (#7, 20 and 21); Six (6) recommendations obtained a strong support but significant opposition designation (#5, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 18), and; Two (2) recommendations obtained a divergence designation (#6 & 14);
  10. The EPDP Team has indicated that it considers all SSAD-related recommendations interdependent, and, as a result, recommends SSAD-related recommendations (Recommendations #1 – 18) be considered as one package by the GNSO Council and subsequently the ICANN Board;
  11. The GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed the Final Report and its recommendations, including during a dedicated webinar on the topic.

RESOLVED

  1. The GNSO Council:
    1. Adopts and recommends to the ICANN Board of Directors the adoption of recommendations #1 – 18 that establish a System for Standardized Access/Disclosure to Non-Public Registration Data;
    2. [if 1a. is adopted] Noting some of the questions surrounding the financial sustainability of SSAD and some of the concerns expressed within the different minority statements, the GNSO Council requests a consultation with the ICANN Board as part of the delivery of the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to discuss these issues, including whether a further cost-benefit analysis should be conducted before the ICANN Board considers all SSAD-related recommendations for adoption.
  2. The GNSO Council adopts and recommends to the ICANN Board of Directors the adoption of recommendations #19 – 22 that address a number of priority 2 topics.
  3. The GNSO Council directs ICANN org to convene an Implementation Review Team to work on the implementation of these recommendations. If acceptable to the IRT as well as ICANN org, the GNSO Council has no objection if the existing EPDP Phase 1 Implementation Review Team would take on this task, recognizing that there may be a need to refresh membership as well as align the implementation with any work that may remain from the Phase 1 implementation. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with assisting ICANN org in developing the implementation details for the EPDP recommendations, evaluating the proposed implementation of the recommendations as approved by the Board, and working with ICANN staff to ensure that the resultant implementation conforms to the intent of the approved recommendations. The Implementation Review Team shall operate in accordance with the Implementation Review Team Principles and Guidance approved by the GNSO Council in June 2015.
  4. The GNSO Council extends its sincere appreciation to the Chair, Janis Karklins, Vice Chair, Rafik Dammak, EPDP Team members, alternates and support staff of the EPDP Team for their tireless efforts to deliver this Final Report, recognizing that the Council may direct that some further work is undertaken on a number of priority 2 items that were not addressed in the Phase 2 Final Report.

Vote results

20200820

Consent Agenda

  • 3.1 - Action Decision Radar decision - Confirm that Council supports initiation of the IDN Operational Track 1, as recommended by the IDN Scoping Team, that shall focus on the IDN Implementation Guidelines 4.0, which the Council anticipates will be worked on primarily between ICANN org and Contracted Parties, but should allow observers.
  • 3.2 - Action Decision Radar decision - Agree on next steps (i.e., for the EPDP-Phase 1 IRT to prepare draft revisions to the affected policies and publish for public comment) for terminology updates as described in the "EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 27: Registration Data Policy Impacts report" and possible actions as described in the "Possible next steps EPDP P1 Wave 1 Rec 27". In the course of making updates to impacted consensus policies, the EPDP-Phase 1 IRT is instructed to promptly advise the GNSO Council if possible policy changes are required.
  • 3.3 - Approve request for extension of timeline for Issue Report on the Transfer Policy

Vote results

20200723

GNSO Adoption of the Final Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group

Submitted by Erika Mann

Seconded by Rafik Dammak

Whereas,

  1. The New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group was chartered by the the Address Supporting Organization (ASO), the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO), the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), and the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) to develop a proposal(s) for consideration by the Chartering Organizations on the mechanism that should be developed in order to allocate the new gTLD Auction Proceeds.
  2. The final proposed charter (https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter) was submitted to all ICANN SOs/ACs in October 2016, after which each ICANN SO/AC confirmed the adoption of the charter. The GNSO Council adopted the CCWG charter in November 2016 (https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201611).
  3. A call for volunteers (https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2016-12-13-en) was launched in December 2016 and the GNSO appointed five members to the CCWG, including one member serving as Co-Chair. The following GNSO-appointed CCWG members are currently serving on the CCWG: Anne-Aikman Scalese, Jonathan Frost, Johan (Julf) Helsingius, Erika Mann (Co-Chair), and Elliot Noss.
  4. The CCWG commenced its work in January 2017.
  5. On 11 December 2018, the CCWG published its Initial Report (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/new-gtld-auction-proceeds-initial-08oct18-en.pdf) for public comment (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-auction-proceeds-initial-2018-10-08-en). Thirty-seven (37) comments were received in response to this public comment period, including input from the GNSO Council, RySG, RrSG, BC, ISPCP, NCSG, as well as individuals from the GNSO community.
  6. The CCWG reviewed public comments and revised recommendations based on this input and further deliberations. On 23 December 2019, the CCWG published a proposed Final Report (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-final-23dec19-en.pdf) for public comment (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-auction-proceeds-final-2019-12-23-en) and requested targeted input from the community on sections of the report that had changed substantially since publication of the Initial Report. Twelve (12) comments were received in response to this public comment period, including input from the RySG, RrSG, IPC, and NCSG.
  7. The CCWG reviewed all of the input received and submitted its Final Report (https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/ccwg-auction-proceeds-to-gnso-council-29may20-en.pdf) to the Chartering Organizations for their consideration on 29 May 2020.
  8. The GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed the Final Report and Recommendations.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council adopts the Final Report and Recommendations of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group.
  2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to share the results of this motion with the Chairs of the Auction Proceeds CCWG as soon as possible.
  3. The GNSO Council expresses its sincere appreciation to the Auction Proceeds CCWG, the GNSO appointed members and participants in that effort, and especially the GNSO-appointed Co-Chair, Erika Mann, for all their hard work in achieving the delivery of the Final Report and Recommendations.

Vote results

20200624-1

Motion Requesting a Preliminary Issue report on the Transfer Policy
Submitted by: Pam Little

Seconded by: Rafik Dammak

Whereas,

  1. Recommendation 18 of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D PDP Working Group's Final Report states, "[t]he Working Group recommends that contracted parties and ICANN should start to gather data and other relevant information that will help inform a future IRTP review team in its efforts;"
  2. ICANN org, in response to Recommendation 18 of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D PDP Working Group's Final Report, delivered the Transfer Policy Status Report (TPSR) to the GNSO Council on 22 April 2019;
  3. The GNSO Council issued a call for volunteers for a Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team on October 3, 2019;
  4. The Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team held its first meeting on December 5, 2019;
  5. ICANN org delivered the EPDP Recommendation 27 Wave 1 Report, which included an inventory of potential inconsistencies with the Transfer Policy and the EPDP Phase 1 recommendations, to the GNSO Council on 19 February 2020;
  6. The Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team delivered its recommendations in the Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper on April 6, 2020;
  7. The Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team recommended the GNSO Council instruct ICANN Policy staff to draft a Preliminary Issue Report, outlining, et.al., the issues described within the Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper;

Resolved:

  1. The GNSO Council hereby requests the preparation of a Preliminary Issue Report, for delivery as expeditiously as possible, on the issues identified in the Transfer Policy Initial Scoping Paper, to assist in determining whether a PDP or series of PDPs should be initiated regarding changes to the Transfer Policy.

Vote result

20200521-1

Consent Agenda

  • Approval of the PTI SLA for the ccTLD Creation and Transfer Process
  • Reappointment of Matthew Shears to seat 14 on the ICANN Board. The NCPH has reappointed Matthew Shears for Seat 14 on the ICANN Board of Directors. This agenda item is intended to acknowledge the selection and confirm that the notification process as outlined in Section 7.25 of the ICANN Bylaws has been completed.

Vote results

20200220

Adoption of the PDP 3.0 Implementation Final Report

Whereas,

  1. GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) 3.0 is a GNSO Council initiative aimed at introducing incremental improvements to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of GNSO PDPs.
  2. On 24 October 2018, the GNSO Council resolved to adopt the GNSO PDP 3.0 Proposed Improvements Paper and provided full support for fourteen (14) improvements.
  3. In January 2019 during the GNSO Council's Strategic Planning Session (SPS), the GNSO Council decided that a Small Team of Councilors should be convened to support the implementation efforts in collaboration with the GNSO support staff. Led by Rafik Dammak, a GNSO Council Vice Chair, the Small Team met regularly between April 2019 and February 2020, with designated leads working with staff to advance the implementation of each improvement.
  4. To facilitate the GNSO Council's review, the Small Team delivered four packages to the GNSO Council in an incremental manner: Package one, on improvements 1, 2, 3, and 6 was delivered on 13 August 2019; Package two, on improvements 11, 12, 14, and 16 was delivered on 25 September 2019; Package three, on improvements 5 and 13 was delivered on 22 October 2019; and Package four, on improvements 9 and 15 was delivered on 21 November 2019.
  5. During the process of developing and finalizing the proposed implementation, the ICANN community and the ICANN org were consulted for input and suggestions via various mechanisms, including but not limited to: interviews and small group discussions, GNSO Council mailing lists and meetings, invitation to provide written input, and a public webinar on 9 December 2019.
  6. While the PDP 3.0 precedes ICANN's Evolution of the Multistakeholder Model (MSM) project, the implementation is nevertheless connected. The GNSO Council commented on the Evolution of the MSM's initial report and engaged with Brian Cute, the project's facilitator, before and during the ICANN66 meeting in Montréal. In Appendix C of ICANN's Draft FY21-25 Operating & Financial Plans and Draft FY21 Operating Plan & Budget, which documents the outcome of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project, three (3) out of the six (6) workstreams align with the PDP 3.0 implementation; the GNSO is being proposed to lead the "Issue A: Consensus + representation and Inclusivity" workstream.
  7. In January-February 2020, the Small Team conducted additional activities, including: 1) revising the GNSO PDP working group charter template; 2) identifying sections in the current GNSO Operating Procedures that could be revised after the GNSO Council reviews the effectiveness of PDP 3.0 implementation; and 3) discussing "Parking Lot" items that might benefit from future work.
  8. In January 2020 during GNSO Council's SPS, the GNSO Council dedicated several sessions to the discussion of PDP 3.0 and agreed on several action items as the next steps for the implementation efforts.
  9. On 10 February 2020, the Small Team completed thirteen (13) out of fourteen (14) PDP 3.0 improvements and delivered its Final Report to the GNSO Council for its consideration. The Final Report provides an overview of the PDP 3.0 implementation process and outcomes, a consolidation of all of the work products incorporating community feedback as appropriate, and suggested effective time frame for deployment of the improvements.
  10. The last remaining work product related, the Consensus Playbook, is originated from PDP 3.0 Improvement #4 and not complete. While, the Consensus Playbook is not strictly a PDP 3.0 product, it is intended to be utilized by the broader ICANN community beyond the GNSO. Its pending status should not prevent the GNSO Council adoption of the Implementation Final Report from the PDP 3.0 Small Team. Adoption of the Consensus Playbook will be voted upon by the GNSO Council at a later date.

Resolved,

  1. The GNSO Council hereby adopts the GNSO PDP 3.0 Implementation Final Report and instructs GNSO Support Staff to work with the GNSO Council leadership on the deployment of improvements based on the effective time frame proposed by the PDP 3.0 Small Team.
  2. The GNSO Council requests future charter drafting teams of the GNSO Council to commence chartering for upcoming PDP efforts by utilizing the revised GNSO working group charter template and other related PDP 3.0 work products, and report to the GNSO Council on whether they help achieve the intended outcomes.
  3. The GNSO Council requests that after all PDP 3.0 improvements are in effect, the GNSO Council conducts a review of the implementation effectiveness in a timely manner.
  4. The GNSO Council requests that following the GNSO Council review of the PDP 3.0 implementation effectiveness, the GNSO Council considers any necessary updates to the GNSO Operating Procedures and uses the relevant work product in the PDP 3.0 Implementation Final Report as a starting point.
  5. The GNSO Council confirms that none but one (1) "Parking Lot" item (Statement of Interest Review) identified by the PDP 3.0 Small Team should be moved forward until the GNSO Council has the opportunity to evaluate the PDP 3.0 implementation effectiveness.
  6. The GNSO Council thanks to the PDP 3.0 Small Team, GNSO support staff, and others who have contributed to the implementation of GNSO PDP 3.0 improvements as well as the proposed implementation work products to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of GNSO PDPs.

Vote results

20200123

Consent agenda: 2 items

  • Nomination of a Mentor for the ICANN Fellowship Program

    Whereas,

    1. On 13 November 2019, the ICANN Fellowship Program invited ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees to nominate one individual each (total of 7) to serve on the capacity of Fellowship Program mentor for three consecutive ICANN meetings, beginning with ICANN68 (see https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2019-11-13-en)
    2. On 3 December 2019, the GNSO launched an Expression of Interest (EOI) process to solicit volunteers for the GNSO-nominated mentor position (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-03dec19-en.htm).
    3. The GNSO Council tasked the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) with reviewing applications and recommending one individual for the GNSO to nominate.
    4. The SSC reviewed the applications received, taking into account the criteria outlined in the EOI announcement.
    5. The SSC submitted its full consensus recommendation to the GNSO Council on 13 January 2020, by way of submission of the relevant motion.
    6. The GNSO Council considered the recommendations of the SSC.

    Resolved,

    1. The GNSO nominates Amr Elsadr to serve as a ICANN Fellowship Program mentor for three consecutive ICANN meetings, beginning with ICANN68.
    2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to communicate resolved #1 to staff supporting the ICANN Fellowship Program.
    3. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the nominated candidate that he or she has been selected.
    4. The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Secretariat to send a response to those applicants who were not nominated, thanking them for their interest and encouraging them to apply for future opportunities as they arise.

    Confirmation of Johan Helsingius as the Chair and Carlton Samuels as Vice-Chair for the GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC).

    Vote results

20200123-2

Addendum to the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Charter to Integrate Recommendation 5 From IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms Final Report

WHEREAS:

  1. On 9 July 2018, the Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group on International Governmental Organizations (IGO) and International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGO) Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms submitted its Final Report to the GNSO Council. The Final Report contains five policy recommendations on which the Working Group reached consensus.
  2. On 19 July 2018, the GNSO Council acknowledged receipt of the PDP Final Report, noted that, "[i]n view of the need to consider the topic of curative rights protections for IGOs in the broader context of appropriate overall scope of protection for all IGO identifiers (including IGO acronyms), the GNSO Council intends to review this Final Report … with a view toward developing a possible path forward that will also facilitate the resolution of the outstanding inconsistencies between GAC advice and prior GNSO policy recommendations on the overall scope of IGO protections";
  3. Between July 2018 and March 2019, the GNSO Council discussed the PDP Final Report at various meetings and considered the procedural options available to it under the GNSO's Operating Rules and ICANN Bylaws
  4. On 18 April 2019, the GNSO Council resolved to approve, and recommend that the ICANN Board adopt, Recommendations 1, 2, 3 & 4 of the PDP Final Report.
  5. The GNSO Council elected not to approve Recommendation 5 of the PDP Final Report and directed the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs (RPM) PDP to consider, as part of its Phase 2 work, whether an appropriate policy solution can be developed that is generally consistent with Recommendations 1, 2, 3 & 4 of the PDP Final Report and:
    1. accounts for the possibility that an IGO may enjoy jurisdictional immunity in certain circumstances;
    2. does not affect the right and ability of registrants to file judicial proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction;
    3. preserves registrants' rights to judicial review of an initial UDRP or URS decision; and
    4. recognizes that the existence and scope of IGO jurisdictional immunity in any particular situation is a legal issue to be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.
  6. The GNSO Council had engaged with the GAC on several occasions during its deliberations on the PDP Final Report, including at the joint GAC-GNSO meeting at ICANN65 in Kobe, Japan, where the GNSO Council had sought the GAC's feedback on the GAC's willingness to participate in a targeted effort focusing on the issue of curative rights for IGOs and possibly drawing on the community's recent experiences with the Expedited PDP on the Temporary Specification and Work Track 5 of the GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP
  7. At ICANN65 in Marrakech, members of the GNSO Council met with certain members of the GAC and IGOs, where there appeared to be agreement from the GAC/IGOs to support the chartering of this separate work. On 20 August, the GAC sent a letter to the ICANN Board, affirming, "its willingness to participate in such chartering effort." Dialogue between the GNSO Council, GAC, and IGOs continued at ICANN66 in Montreal, followed by further discussions within the Council.
  8. The GNSO Council, in consultation with the GAC and IGOs, has prepared the necessary amendments to the RPMs Charter, in the form of an Addendum to that Charter ("Addendum").

RESOLVED:

  1. The GNSO Council adopts the amendments to the RPMs Charter to create an IGO Work Track, as reflected in the Addendum.
  2. The GNSO shall collaborate with each GNSO Stakeholder Group, Constituency, SO and AC to expeditiously issue a call for Members and Observers to join the IGO Work Track, each in accordance with its own rules. The GNSO Council specifically notes that Members and Observers, although appointed by community groups, must nevertheless meet the Membership Criteria as defined in the Addendum.
  3. In accordance with the Addendum, the GNSO Council shall conduct an Expressions of Interest process as soon as is reasonably possible, in order to identify and confirm a single, qualified Work Track Chair, consistent with the criteria as defined in the Addendum.
  4. The GNSO Council directs the Work Track Chair and Members to conduct its work in as efficient and effective a manner as possible; and as such, monthly written updates shall be submitted to the GNSO Council by the IGO Work Track Chair and/or Council liaison to the Work Track. These updates must include a report as to the progress of the Work Track according to the timeline and milestones identified in its Work Plan.
  5. The GNSO Council further directs the Work Track Chair and Members to develop a Work Plan and timeline for its work as a matter of priority and as its first order of business. To facilitate this effort, the GNSO Council instructs ICANN staff to prepare a draft Work Plan and timeline for the Work Track, based on the model adopted for the Expedited Policy Development Process on gTLD Registration Data. The GNSO Council requests that the Work Track Chair submit a proposed Work Plan and timeline to the GNSO Council within four (4) weeks of the first meeting of the Work Track.
  6. To facilitate communications between the GNSO and the GAC on this topic, the GNSO Council directs the GNSO liaison to the GAC to provide regular progress reports to the GAC.
  7. The GNSO Council thanks the members of the GNSO Council, as well as those from the GAC and IGOs, for their contributions in developing the Addendum.

Vote results