Page History
...
Item 3: Consent agenda (0 minutes)
Item 4: MOTION –
...
Initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D (10 minutes)
Description of motion
The Council requested an Issue Report on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D at its meeting on 17 October 2012. The Final Issue Report was submitted to the GNSO Council on 8 January 2013. The Council is now requested to consider the initiation of a PDP on the issues outlined in the Final Issue Report.
Link to motion
4.1 Reading of the motion (ProposerMason Cole).
4.2 Discussion of motion and next steps.
4.3 Vote (Standard threshold: simple majority of each house).Initiate a PDP: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House)
Item 5: MOTION –
...
Motion for Approval of a Charter for the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D Working Group (WG)(10 minutes)
Description of motionNormally, when a PDP is initiated, the Council convenes a DT to draft a charter for the work to be carried out. In this instance, in the interest of efficiency and because the issues laid out in the IRTP-D Final Issues Report are very precise, it is being suggested that the Council adopt the charter as proposed and request that this work be started by a WG asap. A motion is being made to that effect, to be considered only if the first IRTP-D motion passes.
Link to motion
5.1 Reading of the motion (ProposerMason Cole).
5.2 Discussion of motion and next steps.
5.3 Vote (Standard threshold: simple majority of each house).Approve a PDP Team Charter for a PDP within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House)
Item 6: INFORMATION & DISCUSSION - GNSO Council Review and SIC Update (15 minutes)
...
6.3 Next Steps
Item 7: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) Strawman Proposal and Defensive Registrations Discussion (20 Minutes)
ICANN’s CEO has requested GNSO Council input on the Strawman Proposal recently developed through the TMCH related implementation discussions, which has been posted for public comment. http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-30nov12-en.htm. ICANN’s CEO additionally requested Council input on the joint proposal from the Business Constituency/Intellectual Property Constituency (BC/IPC) for a “limited preventative registration mechanism” which is also currently available for public comment. A subsequent note (19 December 2012) from ICANN’s CEO clarified the desired deadline for input to be no later than 22 February 2013.
Related to this discussion is the Staff briefing paper (http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/32287) to the GNSO Council on the topic of defensive registrations at the second level, in response to a previous request from the New GLTD Committee (2012.04.10.NG2). The New GTLD Committee requested the GNSO to consider whether additional work on defensive registrations at the second level should be undertaken.
The Council is to continue to discuss: (i) a response to the ICANN CEOs request, and (ii) to consider whether to undertake any additional work related to the BC/IPC proposal and/or the Staff briefing paper, on the topic of second level defensive registrations.
7.1 Update1 Update
7.2 Discussion
7.3 Next Steps
Item 8: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Response to the GAC Letter (20 minutes)
The GAC has sent a letter to the GNSO Council with regard to the initiation of a PDP on the IGO/INGO issue, and specifically requesting a rationale for undertaking a PDP i.e. an explanation as to why GNSO believes this issue should be evaluated through a PDP rather than simply executed as an implementation process. The Council has sent an initial response and now needs to move ahead with developing a full response.
...
Item 9: INFORMATION & DISCUSION – Policy vs. Implementation (20 minutes)
The recent letter from the GAC as well as activities relating to work on the Trademark Clearinghouse, highlights a broader issue regarding the boundary between policy development and implementation work as well as the effective integration of policy development and integration work from the outset.
Recent discussions on the Council mailing list indicate that there is an interest to undertake further work on this issue. At the same time, ICANN Staff has published a paper (include link when available
(http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/36239) that is intended to facilitate further community discussions on this topic.
9.1 Update from Staff (Marika Konings)
9.2 Discussion
9.3 Next steps
Item 10: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - ATRT2 Developments (5 minutes)
The call for applicants to serve on the next Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT) has been extended until 14 January 2013. (See: http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-03dec12-en.htm ). An update on the process and next steps to provide GNSO Council endorsements of applicants will be provided.
...
10.1 Update (Wolfe-Ulrich Knoben)
10.2 Discussion
10.3 Next steps
Item 11: UPDATE & DISCUSSION - Whois Privacy and Proxy Relay and Reveal Study (10 minutes)
At the ICANN Meeting in Toronto, Lyman Chapin presented the results of the survey that evaluated the feasibility of conducting a future in-depth study into communication Relay and identity Reveal requests sent for gTLD domain names registered using Proxy and Privacy services (include link to presentation). The Council should consider whether to go ahead with the study.
11.1 – Update from Staff (Barbara Roseman)
11.2 – Discussion
11.3 – Next steps
Item 12: Any Other Business (5 minutes)
...
For other places see: http://www.timeanddate.com
http://tinyurl.com/ado9n7t
