Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 4.0


Made by: John Berard
Seconded by: Debbie Hughes (With Friendly Amendment proposed by the RySG marked in red)


In October 2007, the GNSO Council concluded that a comprehensive and objective understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD WHOIS system would benefit future GNSO policy development efforts (
Before defining study details, the Council solicited suggestions from the community for specific topics of study on WHOIS. Suggestions were submitted ( and ICANN staff prepared a 'Report on Public Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS', dated 25-Feb-2008 (


Council requests ICANN staff to proceed with the WHOIS Registrant Identification Study, as described in Staff's 23-Mar-2010 Report, using the vendor selection process described in Annex of that same report. (

Council defers consideration of the WHOIS Registrant Identification Study until the 28 April 2011 meeting and requests that any applicable motions in that regard be submitted not later than 20 April 2011.

Further resolved, that the Council requests ICANN staff amend the study to include the RySG proposed changes and to proceed with the Whois Privacy and Proxy “Abuse” study, as described in staff’s 5-October-2010 report as amended, using the vendor selection process described in that same report,

Further resolved, that the Council requests ICANN staff to proceed with the Whois Privacy and Proxy “Relay and Reveal” pre-study survey, as proposed in staff’s 11-February-2011 report,
Further resolved, that the Council request that the Board authorize additional funding for FY 2012 forWhois studies, to make up any shortfall of $130,000 between the amount of “at least $400,000” that was allocated for Whois studies in FY 2011 (and remains unspent), and the total amount needed to conduct the Whois Misuse Study ($150,000) if subsequently approved; the Whois Registrant Identification Study ($150,000); the Proxy/Privacy “Abuse” Study ($150,000); and the Proxy and Privacy “Pre-study” ($80,000), total of $530,000.


RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that this process be initiated by ICANN immediately.

3. Motion to adopt the Charter for the Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI)

Made by: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

Seconded by: Mary Wong and Jonathan Robinson

 Whereas the GNSO Council resolved at its meeting on 8 December 2010 to establish a drafting team to draft a charter for a Standing Committee to track and coordinate implementation of those OSC, PPSC and work team recommendations already approved by the Council and adopted, as recommended by the Communications and Coordination Work Team in its final report of 9 April 2010;


.     An activity timeline

4. Proposed motion on the JIG Final Report on Single Character IDN TLDs


Made by: Ching Chiao


Seconded by: Rafik Dammak and Adrian Kinderis



 The Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG) was created by mutual charters of the ccNSO ( and the GNSO (;


 RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council hereby expresses its appreciation to the JIG for their hardwork, and look forward to receiving further reports on "IDN Variant TLDs" and "Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs".

 5.  MOTION RE: Revision of  Section 5.0 Statements of   Interest of the  GNSO Council  Operating  Procedures  

 Made by: Stéphane Van Gelder

Seconded by: Adrian Kinderis

WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework for implementing the various GNSO Improvements
identified and approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008;