Page History
Draft motion – Confirmation that modification to the procedure that implements the Whois conflicts with privacy law policy recommendation with the Contracted Party Request and Legal Opinion triggers is consistent with the intent of the policy recommendation - MOTION WITHDRAWN
Submitted by: Keith Drazek
...
Submitted by: Donna Austin
Seconded by: Rafik Dammak
Whereas,
1.The GNSO Council adopted the proposed process and criteria for the selection of the GNSO representative to the Empowered Community Administration during its meeting on 28 June 2017 (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201706).
2.Per that process, the GNSO Council confirmed on 9 November 2017 that the GNSO Chair (currently Heather Forrest) will represent the GNSO as the Decisional Participant on the Empowered Community Administration on an interim basis.
...
1.The GNSO Council hereby confirms [Name] Heather Forrest will represent the GNSO as the Decisional Participant on the Empowered Community Administration until the end of the ICANN Annual General Meeting (ICANN63).
...
Submitted by Donna Austin
Seconded by Rafik Dammak
Whereas,
1.The Governmental Advisory Committee advises the ICANN Board on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. It usually does so as part of a Communiqué, which is published towards the end of every ICANN meeting.
...
1.The GNSO Council adopts the GNSO Review of the Abu Dhabi GAC Communiqué (see [include link] https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/review-gac-communique-30nov17-en.pdf) and requests that the GNSO Council Chair communicate the GNSO Review of the Abu Dhabi GAC Communiqué to the ICANN Board.
2.The GNSO Council requests that the GNSO Chair also informs the GAC Chair of the communication between the GNSO Council and the ICANN Board.
Motion to Refer IRTP Part C Privacy / Proxy Registrations Implementation Issues to PPSAI IRT
Submitted by Darcy Southwell
Seconded by Donna Austin
1.The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council sent a letter (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/bladel-to-crocker-01dec16-en.pdf) to the ICANN Board on 1 December 2016 regarding implementation concerns with the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy ("Transfer Policy") – Part C for privacy/proxy registrations. Specifically, the concerns relate to whether the addition/removal of a privacy/proxy service potentially triggers the 60-day inter-registrar transfer lock described in the updated Transfer Policy. The policy recommendations were silent with respect to the addition/removal of privacy/proxy services, and at the time the policy was implemented, the current issue and potential harms described by the GNSO Council were not brought to ICANN org's attention.
2.In this letter, the GNSO Council requested the Board to instruct ICANN Org to work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group and other interested parties to evaluate alternatives for the implementation concerns related to Transfer Policy Part C.
3.On 16 March 2017, the Board instructed the ICANN President and CEO, or his designee(s), to work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group and other interested parties to evaluate alternatives for the implementation concerns related to Transfer Policy Part C and to report back to the GNSO Council with the results of the discussion.” During this time, enforcement of the policy related to this specific issue has been deferred.
4.The Registrar Stakeholder Group discussed this issue and reached out to other interested parties to evaluate alternatives for the implementation concerns related to IRTP Part C and recommended that this issue is further evaluated by the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues Implementation Review Team (PPSAI IRT) as this group is best placed to determine if/how implementation of IRTP Part C for privacy / proxy registrations can be carried out.
Resolved,
1.The GNSO Council directs the PPSAI IRT to consider the issue of privacy/proxy registrations and IRTP Part C as outlined in the annex to the GNSO Council letter (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/bladel-to-crocker-01dec16-en.pdf) and to put forward recommendations for implementation that are consistent with the IRTP Part C policy recommendations as well as the PPSAI policy recommendations.
2.The GNSO Council requests that this work be undertaken only after the upcoming PPSAI IRT comment period, and that if it appears as though it will cause any significant or unreasonable delay in implementation of privacy/proxy service accreditation implementation, that the GNSO Council Liaison must alert the Council.
3.The GNSO Council encourages registrars and other impacted parties to join the PPSAI IRT to collaborate in these discussions.
4.The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Council Liaison to the PPSAI IRT (in consultation with ICANN org and the IRT) provides regular updates on the timeline for incorporating the issue of privacy/proxy registrations and the Transfer Policy into the work of the PPSAI implementation plan. Where issues emerge during implementation that may require possible policy discussion, the Council requests GNSO Council Liaison to the PPSAI IRT to escalate these issues using the designated procedure outlined in the Final Recommendations Report on Policy & Implementation.
5.The GNSO Council requests the GNSO Council Liaison to the PPSAI IRT to communicate this decision to the PPSAI IRT as soon as possible.
