GNSO Working SessionToronto Sunday 14 October 2012

--What is it about: This is briefing by the SSAC to the GNSO Council on the current activities of the Committee and an invite for discussion on common issues.

--Background The SSAC seeks opportunities to brief the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees on its activities and to encourage dialog on these activities.

--Topics
1.  SSAC 2012 Work Plan and Current Activity Report
2.  SAC055: SSAC Comment on the WHOIS Review Team Final Report
3.  Questions and Discussion

Fake Renewal Notices

What is it about: Fake renewal notices are misleading correspondence sent to registrants from an individual or organisation claiming to be or to represent the current registrar. The RAPWG recommended the initiation of a PDP on this topic, but the Council decided to obtain further information on this issue to help inform its deliberations on whether or not to initiate a PDP. 

Background: A DT was formed to gather further information on this topic from the RrSG and submitted its report to the GNSO Council. Following review of the report and its recommendations by the GNSO Council, Mason Cole proposed to consult the RrSG on the proposed next steps. In its response, the RrSG proposed to address this issue by setting up a meeting with ICANN Compliance to make concerns known, communicating with the relevant jurisdictional authorities and investigate whether or not enforceable contract language can be crafted.

Marika Konings

Mason Cole

Q&A session with Council chair candidates:
Jonathan Robinson http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/robinson-statement-28sep12-en.pdf
Thomas Rickert http://gnso.icann.org/en/elections/rickert-statement-28sep12-en.pdf

Stéphane
van Gelder

Topics provided by the Board

• Any additional input on the WHOIS Policy Review Team Final Report.
• Input and comments on the Security, Stability & Resiliency of the DNS Review Team Final Report, as we intend to vote on this at the Thursday board meeting.    
• Any feedback on the responses to the call for input on “Impact of the new gTLD program on ICANN structure and processes.”  Discussion on how to move forward.
• Seeking input about whether the community sees a need for a policy with respect to declaring patents in policy development or contract negotiations.

What is it about: Status update on the activities of the Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings PDP Working Group

Background information: This PDP WG is tasked to address the locking of a domain name subject to Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) proceedings. For further information, please see https://community.icann.org/display/udrpproceedings/Home.

Marika Konings

Michele Neylon, Chair
Alan Greenberg, Vice-Chair of the WG

What is it about: ICANN Staff will brief the GNSO Council about the Final Issue Report on Uniformity of Contracts To Address Registration Abuse commissioned by the Council. It is expected that the GNSO Council will discuss the report in Toronto and subsequently determine whether to initiate a PDP on the matter.

Background information: The request for an Issue Report on this topic follows the work of the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAPWG). The RAPWG was tasked by the GNSO Council with defining abuse, making a determination between registration abuse versus use abuse, defining the most common forms of abuse, and understanding the effectiveness of abuse provisions within agreements in order to identify and recommend specific policy issues and processes for further consideration by the GNSO Council.

The RAPWG recommended in its Final Report “the creation of an Issues Report to evaluate whether a minimum baseline of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in-scope ICANN agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to address the most common forms of registration abuse.”

The GNSO Council subsequently asked Staff to prepare an Issue Report to evaluate this recommendation last year. Staff posted a Preliminary Issue Report on Uniformity of Contracts on 25 July 2012 for public comment and produced a summary of the community comments on the topic. The Final Issue Report was circulated to the Council on 20 September 2012. 

Following the ATRT recommendations that the NomCom process should be better informed about the qualities and experience (skill-sets) needed of an ICANN Director, the ATRT noted the process of deciding what skill-sets are needed on the Board would include understanding the challenges ICANN faces, the expected evolution of the organization, qualities/experience already covered by current Board members and any gaps (with consideration that a person selected by the NomCom only takes their position sometime later, and can be expected to take a period of time to get up to speed as a Director, etc.)

Questions we would like the Council to consider are what are the skill-sets needed on the Board, collectively and perhaps more specific individual experience and knowledge.  What challenges can we expect ICANN to face over the next 3-5 years?  What advice does the Council have about the characteristics/skill-sets NomCom should be looking for in candidates?

The NomCom's most recent description of the positions the NomCom selects for is the "leadership positions" document available at http://nomcom.icann.org/positions-2012.htm.