Versions Compared

Old Version 21

changes.mady.by.user Steve Chan

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Steve Chan

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Item 3: Consent Agenda (15 minutes)

 

Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE – IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms (20 minutes)- Approval of the appointment of Janis Karklins as Chair for the Expedited Policy Development Process Team on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data (5 minutes)

Approval of the appointment of Janis Karklins as Chair for the Expedited Policy Development Process Team on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data. (see: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2019-April/022561.html). Note: Removed from the Consent Agenda (by Councilor request).

4.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership)

4.2 – Council discussion

4.3 – Council vote (voting threshold: simple majority)


Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE – IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms (20 minutes)

The IGO-The IGO-INGO Access to Curative Rights Protection Mechanisms PDP WG worked to resolve a final recommendation relating to IGO jurisdictional immunity and registrants’ rights to file court proceedings. The WG reached agreement on a single recommendation amongst several options for their final recommendation on this area, as well as for all other recommendations. The WG Chair proposed his determination of consensus levels for all recommendations, which the WG has affirmed. On 27 June 2018, the GNSO Council passed a resolution, thanking the PDP WG for its efforts and requesting that it submit its Final Report in time for the 19 July 2018 Council meeting.

...

Here, the Council will vote to approve the set of actions as detailed in the relevant motion.

45.1 – Presentation of motion (Council Leadership)

45.2 – Council discussion

45.3 – Council vote (see directly below for additional detail)

GNSO voting threshold, per the ICANN Bylaws:voting threshold, per the ICANN Bylaws:

(viii) Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.

(ix(viii) Approve a PDP Recommendation Without With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation.

(ix) Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority,

a GNSO Supermajority,

(x) Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.

(xix) A "GNSO Supermajority" shall mean: (A) two-thirds (2/3) of the Council members of each House, or (B) three-fourths (3/4) of the Council members of one House and a majority of the Council members of the other House(x) Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that "a two-thirds vote of the council" demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded.

Board Approval process:

Any PDP Recommendations approved by a GNSO Supermajority Vote shall be adopted by the Board unless, by a vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN. If the GNSO Council recommendation was approved by less than a GNSO Supermajority Vote, a majority vote of the Board will be sufficient to determine that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN.

Taking this action is within the GNSO’s remit as outlined in ICANN’s Bylaws as the GNSO ‘shall be responsible for developing and recommending to the Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains and other responsibilities of the GNSO as set forth in these Bylaws’ (Art.11.1). Furthermore, this action complies with the requirements set out in Annex A: GNSO Policy Development Process of the ICANN Bylaws.


Item 56: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – Managing IDN Variants TLDs (15 minutes)

...

Here, the Council will receive an update and consult with Sarmad Hussain, managing director of ICANN’s IDN Program, to better understand its responsibilities as dispensed by the ICANN Board.

56.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership)

56.2 – Update and council discussion (Sarmad Hussain, ICANN staff)

56.3 – Next steps

 

Item 67: COUNCIL UPDATE – Status of the EPDP on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Phase 1 Informal Implementation Review Team (15 minutes)

...

Here, the Council will receive a status update on the progress of the informal implementation efforts.

67.1 – Update (Russ Weinstein, ICANN staff)

67.2 – Council discussion

67.3 – Next steps

 

Item 78: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Updated Timeline for the PDP on the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDS (15 minutes)

...

Here, the Council will receive an update on the progress of the PDP from the Council liaison and discuss possible next steps.

78.1 – Introduction of topic (Paul McGrady, GNSO Council Liaison to the PDP)

78.2 – Council discussion

78.3 – Next steps


Item 89: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (10 minutes)

89.1 - Reminder for funded travelers to book their travel for ICANN65

89.2 - GNSO Council - Input to Establish IRP Standing Panel

...