Page History
1. Motion on the Adoption of the IRTP Part B Recommendation #3 (Issue Report on ‘Thick’ WHOIS)
Made by:Tim Ruiz
Seconded by: Stéphane van Gelder
...
a. Whether a process for urgent return/resolution of a domain name should be developed, as discussed within the SSAC hijacking report
http://www.icann.org/announcements/hijacking-report-12jul05.pdf); see also (http://www.icann.org/correspondence/cole-to-tonkin-14mar05.htm)
b. Whether additional provisions on undoing inappropriate transfers are needed, especially with regard to disputes between a Registrant and Admin Contact (AC). The policy is clear that the Registrant can overrule the AC, but how this is implemented is currently at the discretion of the registrar;
...
RESOLVED, the GNSO Council requests an Issue Report on the requirement of ‘thick’ WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs. Such an Issue Report and possible subsequent Policy Development Process should not only consider a possible requirement of 'thick' WHOIS or all incumbent gTLDs in the context of IRTP, but should also consider any other positive and/or negative effects that are likely to occur outside of IRTP that would need to be taken into account when deciding whether a requirement of 'thick' WHOIS for all incumbent gTLDs would be desirable or not. (IRTP Part B Recommendation #3)
2. Motion to extend the mandate of the Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG)
Made by: Rafik Dammak
Seconded by: Ching Chiao
...
The JIG Working Group is extended through 2012 to complete work items Two (2. IDN Variant TLDs) and Three (3. Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs ) from the original charter.
3. Motion on the Adoption of the PEDNR Final Report and Recommendations
Made by: Tim Ruiz
Seconded by: Stéphane van Gelder
...
The GNSO Council shall convene a PEDNR Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN Staff in developing the implementation details for the new policy should it be approved by the ICANN Board. The Implementation Review Team will be tasked with evaluating the proposed implementation of the policy recommendations as approved by the Board and is expected to work with ICANN Staff to ensure that the resultant implementation meets the letter and intent of the approved policy. If the PEDNR Implementation Review Team identifies any potential modifications to the policy or new PEDNR policy recommendations, the PEDNR Implementation Review Team shall refer these to the GNSO Council for its consideration and follow-up, as appropriate. Following adoption by the ICANN Board of the recommendations, the GNSO Secretariat is authorized to issue a call for volunteers for a PEDNR Implementation Review Team to the members of the PEDNR Working Group.
4. Motion regarding Public Comments on the Policy Development Process Work Team Final Report
Made by: Jeff Neuman
Seconded by: Carlos Aguirre
...
RESOLVED, the GNSO Council directs the PDP-WT to review the Summary and Analysis document as well as the comments and make any changes to the PDP-WT Final Report as deemed appropriate. The PDP-WT should submit the updated version of the Final Report to the GNSO Council as soon as possible, preferably in time for consideration at its next meeting on 8 September.
5. Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations
(For discussion only)
Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group submitted its report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf);
...
RESOLVED, in response to Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #1, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and agrees with the RAPWG that no further action is called for at this time.
6. MOTION TO CREATE JOINT WORKING GROUP ON CONSUMER CHOICE, COMPETITION, AND INNOVATION (CCI):
Made by: Rosemary Sinclair
Seconded by:
Whereas, on 10 December 2010, the ICANN Board adopted Resolution 30 (http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-10dec10-en.htm#) requesting advice from the GNSO, CCNSO, ALAC and GAC on establishing the definition, measures, and three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the domain name system, such advice to be provided for discussion at the ICANN International Public meeting in San Francisco from 13-18 March 2011;
Whereas, since the receipt of this request, the GNSO Council has conducted preliminary work (led by Rosemary Sinclair) to develop these metrics through various workshops conducted at the Silicon Valley ICANN Meeting, and the Singapore ICANN Meeting;
Whereas, as a result of these preliminary activities, there is a desire to form a joint working group with any of these SO/ACs interested in participating in this joint effort to fulfill this Board request, in accordance with the Draft Charter (attached) presented to the GNSO Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
Resolved, that the GNSO Council directs that a joint working group be formed to respond to the Board’s request, and to produce recommendations to be delivered to each participating SO/AC to respond to the Board request for establishing the definition, measures, and three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the domain name system;
Resolved further, that this newly formed joint working group is not authorized to forward its recommendations to, or otherwise communicate its findings directly with, the ICANN Board;
Resolved further, that Rosemary Sinclair shall serve as the GNSO Council Liaison for this joint working group;
Resolved further, it is recognized that the Consumer Choice, Competition, and Innovation (CCI) WG has already met informally and commenced activities in furtherance of this effort. Until such time as the WG can select a chair and that chair can be confirmed by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council Liaison shall act as interim chair; and
Resolved further, that the Charter (attached) is hereby approved for the CCI WG. As specified in the Charter, a Working Group Report is to be produced for consideration at the ICANN Dakar Meeting in October, 2011.
Resolved further, that in the event that no other SO/AC approves of the terms of this Charter, the CCI WG shall continue to proceed as a GNSO Council only activity.
