Page History
...
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;
...
Whereas the GNSO Council has reviewed the charter.
RESOLVED,
Wiki Markup
The GNSO Council further directs that the work of the IRTP Part C WG be initiated no later then 14 days after the approval of this motion. 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.
...
6. Motion for the Joint SO/AC Working Group on New gTLD Applicant Support FINAL REPORT
Made by: Rafik Dammak
Seconded by: Olga Cavalli
amended by Jeff Neuman on behalf of the gTLD Registries SG
Whereas:
The GNSO Council and ALAC established the Joint SO/AC Working Group (JASWG) on support for new gTLD applicants in April of 2010; and
The Joint SO/AC Working Group released its second second Milestone Report, posted for consideration by the Board, Chartering Organizations and at-large Community. This report documented the completion of work as defined in the extended charter andand,
The Joint SO/AC Working Group received and discussed the public comments, and
The Joint SO/AC Working Group has completed the enumerated items as defined in its extended charter and has published published a final report (https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/JAS+Issues+and+Recommendations#) on 14 September 2011 covering those chartered items (http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#20110113-1) entitled Final Report of the Joint SO/AC new GTLD applicant support working group. and
The Joint SO/AC Working Group is still in the process of completing some last tasks including completion of the formal documentation of the comment responses for the second milestone community review, and
The GNSO council does has not had a chance to review the Final Report nor digest any of its contents,
However, the GNSO Council does not wish to delay implementation of support wish to delay implementation of support programs for applicants from developing regions,
...
The GNSO Council approves forwarding the final final Report to to the ICANN Board for review and approval, but reserves its right to provide comments to the ICANN Board on all of the recommendations contained therein; and
The GNSO Council request ICANN staff begin working on develop an implementation plan following the JAS WG of the recommendations, subject to comments received from the GNSO community , and
The GNSO Council requests that ICANN staff publish the implementation plan for public comment prior to consideration by the ICANN Board, and
The GNSO Council requests that the Joint SO/AC Working Group complete the publication of the Joint SO/AC Working Group complete the publication of its formal Milestone 2 response document as quickly as possible, and
...
Resolved further, that the GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Chair to communicate its decision to the ALAC Chair.
7.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7. MOTION TO CREATE JOINT WORKING GROUP ON CONSUMER CHOICE, COMPETITION, AND INNOVATION (CCI):
Made by: Rosemary Sinclair
Seconded by:
MOTION TO CREATE JOINT WORKING GROUP ON CONSUMER CHOICE, COMPETITION, AND INNOVATION (CCI):
Made by: Rosemary Sinclair
Seconded by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben
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 Cartagena 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 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf presented to the GNSO Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
Resolved, that the GNSO Council directs that a joint working group be formed to produce a report for consideration by SOs /ACs to assist them to respond to the Board request for establishing the definition, 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 Cartagena ICANN Meeting, and the Singapore ICANN Meeting;
;
Resolved further, that this newly formed joint working group is not authorized to forward 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 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 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf presented to the GNSO Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:
Resolved, that the GNSO Council directs that a joint working group be formed to produce a report for consideration by SOs /ACs to assist them 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 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 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf is hereby approved for the CCI WG. As specified in the Charter http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf, a Working Group Update 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 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf, the CCI WG shall continue to proceed as a GNSO Council chartered joint Working Group.
is hereby approved for the CCI WG. As specified in the Charter http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf, a Working Group Update 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 http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf, the CCI WG shall continue to proceed as a GNSO Council chartered joint Working Group.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8. Motion regarding the nature of Internet-based criminal activity and the information and tools available to help address crime that involves the domain name system;
Made by: Tim Ruiz
Seconded by:
WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has consulted extensively with representatives of international law enforcement agencies regarding the nature of Internet-based criminal activity and the information and tools available to help address crime that involves the domain name system; and
WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has reviewed law enforcement proposals and requests regarding registrar cooperation in addressing online crime; and
WHEREAS, the GNSO Council is prepared to assist law enforcement in its long-term effort to address Internet-based criminal activity;
NOW THEREFORE, the GNSO Council recommends to the ICANN Board of Directors that:
1. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff must keep on record, a valid physical address for the purpose of receiving legal service. This record must include a valid street address, city, appropriate region, telephone number and fax number. Registrars must publish this information on their respective web sites, and must notify ICANN staff and update their published addresses within 30 days of a change of address.
2. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff must keep on record, the names of each registrar’s respective corporate President, Vice President, and Secretary, or the appropriate equivalents of those positions. These data may be made available upon request to a verified representative of a law enforcement agency, in a manner agreed to by ICANN staff, ICANN-accredited registrars, and representatives of law enforcement agencies. Registrars will notify ICANN of any changes in this information within 30 days of a change.
3. ICANN-accredited registrars must publish on their respective web sites e-mail and postal mail addresses to which law enforcement actions may be directed. The e-mail address will use a uniform convention (example: lawenforcement@example.tld) to facilitate ease of use by law enforcement agencies. Registrars may, at their individual discretion, include language in this section of their web sites, directed to the general public, that makes clear the use and expected outcomes of these points of contact and identifies the appropriate points of contact for other forms of business. Requests submitted by verified law enforcement agencies to this discrete point of contact must receive an acknowledgement of receipt from the registrar within 24 hours.
4. Law enforcement agencies provide, within six months of the date of approval of this policy by the ICANN Board and via the general advice of the GAC to the Board, their recommendations for a database and identification system that allows for expedient identification to a registrar of a law enforcement agency, and verification of the contacting party as a law enforcement agency upon that agency’s first contact with a registrar.
5. Implementation and execution of these recommendations be monitored by the GNSO. Specifically:
a. ICANN staff will analyze and report to the GNSO at six-month intervals for one year following implementation, until such time as the GNSO resolves otherwise, with the intention of determining:
i. How effectively and to what extent the policies have been implemented and followed by Registrars, and
ii. Whether or not modifications to these policies should be considered by the GNSO as a result of experiences during the implementation and monitoring stages.
b. The purpose of these monitoring and reporting requirements are to allow the GNSO to determine when, if ever, these recommendations and any ensuing policy require additional amendment, clarification or attention based on the results of the reports prepared by ICANN staff.
________________
8. Motion regarding the nature of Internet-based criminal activity and the information and tools available to help address crime that involves the domain name system;
Made by: Tim Ruiz
Seconded by: Carlos Aguirre
Amended by Tim Ruiz
WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has consulted extensively with representatives of international law enforcement agencies regarding the nature of Internet-based criminal activity and the information and tools available to help address crime that involves the domain name system; and
WHEREAS, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has reviewed law enforcement proposals and requests regarding registrar cooperation in addressing online crime; and
WHEREAS, the GNSO Council is prepared to assist law enforcement in its long-term effort to address Internet-based criminal activity;
RESOLVED, the GNSO Council requests an Issues Report on the following possible policy revisions and/or additions:
1. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff must keep on record, a valid physical address for the purpose of receiving legal service. This record must include a valid street address, city, appropriate region, telephone number and fax number.
Registrars must publish this information on their respective web sites, and must notify ICANN staff and update their published addresses within 30 days of a change of address.
2. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff must keep on record, the names of each registrar’s respective corporate President, Vice President, and Secretary, or the appropriate equivalents of those positions. These data may be made available upon request to a verified representative of a law enforcement agency, in a manner agreed to by ICANN staff, ICANN-accredited registrars, and representatives of law enforcement agencies. Registrars will notify ICANN of any changes in this information within 30 days of a change.
3. ICANN-accredited registrars must publish on their respective web sites e-mail and postal mail addresses to which law enforcement actions may be directed. The e-mail address will use a uniform convention
(example: lawenforcement@example.tld) to facilitate ease of use by law enforcement agencies. Registrars may, at their individual discretion, include language in this section of their web sites, directed to the general public, that makes clear the use and expected outcomes of these points of contact and identifies the appropriate points of contact for other forms of business. Requests submitted by verified law enforcement agencies to this discrete point of contact must receive an acknowledgement of receipt from the registrar within 24 hours.
4. Law enforcement agencies provide, within six months of the date of approval of this policy by the ICANN Board and via the general advice of the GAC to the Board, their recommendations for a database and identification system that allows for expedient identification to a registrar of a law enforcement agency, and verification of the contacting party as a law enforcement agency upon that agency’s first contact with a registrar. ----
9. Draft Motion to approve charter for Whois Survey Working Group (WS-WG)
...
Whereas in July 2011, several of these volunteers drafted a proposed charter for a Whois Survey “Working Group”, preferring the term “Working Group” to “Drafting Team” in this case;
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/policies/wswg-charter-12sep11-en.pdf
Resolved,
The GNSO Council convenes a Whois Survey Working Group (WS-WG) of interested volunteers to draft, implement, and analyze the results of a survey measuring the level of support for various technical requirements outlined in the final Inventory of Whois Service Requirements Report of 29 July 2010.
The GNSO Council further approves the proposed charter for the Whois Survey Working Group as defined here: <insert link here>:
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/policies/wswg-charter-12sep11-en.pdf
In accordance with this charter, the Whois Survey Working Group plans to produce a draft survey to be delivered to the GNSO Council for approval by March 2012. Following approval, the Whois Survey Working Group plans to then conduct this survey for a period not less than thirty (30) days, delivering a draft report describing survey results and recommendations for next steps to the GNSO Council.
...
